Jackson J P
Department of Ethnic Studies, University of Colorado, Boulder, USA.
Hist Psychol. 2000 Aug;3(3):239-61. doi: 10.1037/1093-4510.3.3.239.
Psychologists testified at the trials of Brown v. Board of Education and helped write briefs that were submitted to the Supreme Court on appeal. Psychologists were once proud of what they did in Brown but are now seen as liberal reformers who masked their political wishes in the guise of social science. The argument that psychologists involved with Brown were social reformers rather than objective scientists dates to the segregationist critique of Brown. The author traces the history of the critique of the Brown psychologists from its segregationist origins to its acceptance by mainstream social scientific and historical scholars. The author concludes that the critique is based on a misreading of what the Brown psychologists did during the litigation.
心理学家在布朗诉托皮卡教育局案的审判中出庭作证,并协助撰写了上诉时提交给最高法院的案情摘要。心理学家曾为他们在布朗案中的所作所为感到自豪,但现在却被视为自由派改革者,他们以社会科学为幌子掩盖自己的政治意愿。认为参与布朗案的心理学家是社会改革者而非客观科学家的观点可以追溯到对布朗案的种族隔离主义批评。作者追溯了对参与布朗案的心理学家的批评的历史,从其种族隔离主义起源到被主流社会科学和历史学者所接受。作者得出结论,这种批评是基于对参与布朗案诉讼的心理学家的行为的误读。