Setting the APS Agenda

Once upon a time, in decades past, there were (of course) few psychologists and (of course) even fewer psychological organizations. And it came to pass that new psychological organizations appeared and old ones continued to change. Each of us may now belong to several organizations whose members are largely, if not exclusively, psychologists. And many of us also belong to interdisciplinary organizations which are devoted, at least in part, to psychological research and academic issues. These facts alone make it clear that it is unlikely that any single psychological organization can provide all of the opportunities, services and benefits that each of us might wish.

The rapid growth of APS as well as the enthusiasm of its members leaves no doubt that the decision to establish the APS was timely (or perhaps even somewhat overdue). Obviously, we joined APS because we believe that our organization will (or at least should) provide new opportunities, services and benefits. The long term success of APS will depend on the degree to which the achievements of APS match our hopes. As we develop the agenda for APS we should focus on what we believe those hopes to be.

Each of us has a lot of implicit as well as explicit reasons for joining an organization. I assume that most of us joined APS because the organization explicitly represents scientific/academic psychology. As we know, identification is a powerful motive. Beyond that, of course, we expect that the activities of our organization will serve the interests of scientific/academic psychology. Our convention program should provide an effective forum for discussing research issues and research progress. Our journals should reflect the best of contemporary psychological science. The Observer should keep us well informed concerning issues and developments related to psychological science and its contribution to the public interest. APS committees should be established (and continued) only if required to deal with the central aims of the APS. Our efforts to influence federal legislation and policy should focus on issues that impact the viability and quality of psychological research and training. And, APS should work cooperatively with other psychological organizations in issues affecting scientific/academic psychology.

In focusing on this agenda the APS should provide both identification and the services that scientific/academic psychologists expect. And, in so doing, the APS might even live happily ever after.