In defense of military psychology; a reply to Robert Tyson.

Abstract

Official Navy regulations are cited to establish the point that naval personnel are free to publish articles without submitting them to higher authority for approval. The author then discusses the question of direction of the work of psychologists, suggesting that the problem of sponsorship in military fields is essentially not unlike that in any other field where the sponsor is not a professional psychologist. Finally, the importance of psychological programs within the armed forces is stressed on the basis that, whereas consultation and advisory services are valuable for developing and testing ideas and suggestions, they leave essentially untouched the detailed problems of executing programs beyond the idea stage. (See also 21: 2558.) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 2 citations exist upstream.