Pe-Pua Perfecto-Ramos (2012) - Highlighted

Philippines
Oxford Handbooks Online

Philippines
Rogelia Pe-Pua and Pia-Anna Perfecto-Ramos
The Oxford Handbook of the History of Psychology: Global Perspectives
Edited by David B. Baker
Print Publication Date: Jan 2012 Subject: Psychology, History and Systems in Psychology
Online Publication Date: Sep 2012 DOI: 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195366556.013.0019
Abstract and Keywords
This chapter traces the development of Philippine psychology from the introduction of a
Western academic-scientific psychology in the early 1900s to the emergence of a
Sikolohiyang Pilipino (Filipino psychology) indigenous perspective in the 1970s. It
highlights the humble beginnings of the various psychology departments at different
universities around the country, led primarily by Filipinos schooled abroad who were
ardent followers of Piaget, Skinner, Freud, and the like. A shift toward a more
nationalistic spirit led to the discovery of Filipino psychological concepts and methods.
Debates involving the duality between Western psychology and indigenous Filipino
psychology persist, yet acceptance and tolerance of both schools of thought is observed.
To date, Filipino psychologists continue to discover and develop different ways and means
of localizing, contextualizing, and indigenizing their topics, their means of doing
research, and their manner of analyzing data. Western psychology also continues to be a
strong force in the Philippines.
Keywords: Academic-scientific, Filipino psychology, Sikolohiyang Pilipino, indigenization
Psychology has been in existence in the Philippines even before the first psychology
department was established at the University of the Philippines (UP) during the 1920s.
Virgilio Enriquez (1942–1994), known as the Father of Filipino psychology, claimed that,
although the word “psychology” came to Philippine shores at a much later time, the
practice of understanding behaviors, actions and attitudes, personalities, and mental
processes of Filipinos has been in existence since the time of the babaylans (native
priestesses and healers). These local healers practised the earliest forms of
psychotherapy in the country, dating back before the time when the Philippines was
supposedly “discovered” by the fleet sent by the king of Spain. According to Enriquez
(1992), Philippine literature contained the earliest records of psychology in the
Philippines. These works were initially scribbled on plant parts, or passed on orally to
Page 1 of 31
PRINTED FROM OXFORD HANDBOOKS ONLINE (www.oxfordhandbooks.com). © Oxford University Press, 2018. All Rights
Reserved. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a title in
Oxford Handbooks Online for personal use (for details see Privacy Policy and Legal Notice).
Subscriber: Freie Universitaet Berlin; date: 23 January 2019

Philippines
other succeeding generations. Examples of these include the collection of Philippine

proverbs, riddles, folk tales, myths, and epics. Writings in social studies about Filipino
characteristics, customs, beliefs, and practices are likewise attestations of initial efforts
of Filipino writers to observe and document Filipino patterns of behavior.
The above approach of introducing the history of psychology in the Philippines is quite
distinct from the way such history has normally been written, in which the substance
relates to the development of academic-scientific and professional psychology (see for
example Bulatao & Guthrie, 1968; Enriquez, 1977a; Licuanan, 1985; Montiel & Teh, 2004;
Padilla & Aldaba-Lim, 1961; Salazar, 1985; Tan, 1999). This chapter will bring together
the two parts of a duality in examining the development of psychology in the Philippines—
on the one hand, the dominance of academic-scientific (p. 396) psychology; on the other
hand, the emergence of an indigenous psychology. We will outline and describe the
various influences to these two areas while situating the events within the socio-historic-
political milieu in which they occurred.
The chapter has five main sections representing the five main stages in the history of
psychology in the Philippines. We begin with the amalgam of the Spanish-Catholic and the
Western educational systems in the Philippines and their major influences to both
Philippine society and psychology. A discussion on World War II follows, together with the
influx of newer ideas from Western (mostly American) psychology. A look into how martial
law and a political dictatorship brought waves of change to Philippine thought and action
will be the focus of the third section. The historic and pervasive influences of Epifanio de
los Santos Avenue (EDSA)1 and of how a people overthrew a government are highlighted
in the fourth section. The final part looks into the events from the 1990s to the present
and enumerates how Filipino psychologists have continued to heed the call for looking
out for the people’s welfare as well as addressing the trend toward globalization, despite
the numerous struggles and setbacks that came with it. The chapter concludes with a
summary and suggests future directions for the field.
The Spanish-Catholic and American

Educational Systems and the Beginnings of
Philippine Academic-Scientific Psychology
The Philippines was a colony of Spain for 333 years, beginning in 1565. Although
Portuguese navigator Ferdinand Magellan and his crew reached Philippine shores in
1521, it was not until 1565 that Spanish King Phillip II (hence the name given to the
country) appointed a governor-general to lead the country. This marked the beginning of
Spanish colonial rule in the Philippines (Agoncillo, 1990).
Page 2 of 31

Philippines
Formal education was introduced through primary, secondary, and tertiary schools
established by religious congregations. The Spanish and Latin languages were taught, yet
the primary objective of education was the inculcation of Catholic values, beliefs, and
doctrines. Education was initially limited to the Spanish people in the Philippines until the
late 19th century, when formal education became available to the children of wealthy
Filipino families. By learning more about language and religion, a few of these Filipinos
began to question the ways of the colonizers. These educated Filipinos were called
“ilustrados” or “propagandists” and among them were the likes of Jose P. Rizal (1861–
1896), the Philippine national hero. Propagandists spoke about the defects of the
educational system implemented by the colonizers in the Philippines (Agoncillo, 1990).
Their writings provided the much-needed impetus for the development of the Filipino
Nationalist Movement and led to the establishment of the organization Katipunan by
Andres Bonifacio (1863–1897), which later led a revolution to break free from the bonds
of oppression and achieve independence (Constantino, 1975; Zaide & Zaide, 1999). Their
writings and actions helped end Spanish rule in the country, yet not without leaving
behind major influences in the lives of Filipinos. In July 1897, after Bonifacio was
executed by the Spaniards, another revolutionary leader, Emilio Aguinaldo (1869–1964),
established a republican government at Biak-na-Bato in the province of Cavite. A
constitution was drafted to officially signify the separation of the Philippines from the
Spanish monarchy and their formation into an independent state (Agoncillo, 1990).
However, this was a revolutionary government and not a legitimate one. A pact was then
executed that led to the surrender of the revolutionaries, the dissolution of their
government, a laying down of arms, and an initial payment of 400,000 Philippine pesos
out of 1.7 million Philippine pesos in exchange for the revolutionaries’ peaceful surrender
(Ocampo,1998).
It was also during this time that the American government offered to help the Filipino
revolutionaries end more than three decades of Spanish influence. After the Spanish–
American War, the United States entered into an agreement with the Spanish government
regarding the status of the Philippines. The Treaty of Paris was enacted in 1898, and
through it, the Spanish government sold the Philippines to the United States for US$20
million (Agoncillo, 1990).
The United States was considered a stronghold at that time, with more advanced
weaponry and state-of-the-art equipment. To provide the Spaniards with an honorable exit
from the Philippines, a mock battle at sea took place between the U.S. military fleet and
that of Spain. Spain surrendered, and Aguinaldo was advised by the Americans to
establish a dictatorial government (Agoncillo, 1990) that lasted for a month and was then
replaced with a revolutionary government.
Philippine independence was formally proclaimed on June 12, 1898 (Constantino, 1975),
and the first Philippine Republic was inaugurated on January 23, 1899 (Zaide & Zaide,
1999). During this time, (p. 397) a free public school system was introduced. There was a
sudden influx of literature in all fields of study. English became the medium of
Page 3 of 31

Philippines
instruction. Courses were introduced at the tertiary level, including philosophy, history,
and psychology.
Psychology was already being taught to undergraduate students by professors from

philosophy departments in universities and colleges as early as the 1900s. The content
was mainly on Western thought as presented in textbooks—more particularly, on the
works of Skinner, Pavlov, and Freud.
Bulatao (1979; Bulatao & Guthrie, 1968) was among the first writers to outline the
development of academic-scientific psychology in the Philippines. He offered some
explanation as to why nonpsychologists taught the subject to college students for 20
years or more. Apparently, there were not many psychology graduates at the time, and
one did not have to have a background in psychology in order to teach it. As long as one
could read and comprehend the text, then one could teach the subject. This resulted in a
failure to bring students into a much deeper understanding of and grounding in
psychological thought and experience.
It was not until the mid-1920s that Filipinos began taking the lead by pursuing further
studies in the United States and establishing and eventually heading the psychology
departments at different universities upon their return. Agustin Alonzo (d. 1981) received
his Ph.D. in experimental psychology from the University of Chicago in 1926. He was the
very first psychologist to head the department of psychology at the state-run UP. He was
succeeded by Isidoro Panlasigui, who received his Ph.D. in education from the University
of Iowa in 1928. In 1930, Sinforoso Padilla received his Ph.D. in psychology from the
University of Michigan2 (Bulatao & Guthrie, 1968; Licuanan, 1985).
During the 1930s, the University of Santo Tomas became the first institution to offer a
B.S., a master’s, and a doctoral degree in psychology (Padilla & Aldaba-Lim, 1961). In
1932, Jesus Perpinan, who completed his Ph.D. from Iowa State University, set up the
psychology department at the Far Eastern University (FEU). He also set up the FEU
psychological clinic, which offered counselling, testing, hypnosis, and therapy (Licuanan,
1985).
It was also around this time (1934) that the independence of the Philippines from the
United States was formally approved through the establishment of the Commonwealth
Republic. The Commonwealth Republic served as a transition government whose primary
aim was to prepare the country for complete independence from the United States. At the
end of a 10-year transition period, a fully independent, true Republic of the Philippines
was formed (Agoncillo, 1990).
During this first era in academic-scientific psychology in the Philippines (1900–1945), the
Filipino pioneers set out to establish academic departments in universities and colleges.
Most of them had obtained their postgraduate degree overseas (mainly in the United
States), thus reflecting varying, but mostly Western, schools of psychological thought.
Bulatao (1979) categorized the Filipino psychologists at that time into four groups: “the
pious pupils of Piaget, the daring disciples of Drucker, the fervent followers of Freud and
Page 4 of 31

Philippines
the scientific students of Skinner” (pp. 33–35). Inspired by their mentors, they sought
arduously to establish their clinical practice, in order to professionally apply their
knowledge and skills, and to further inform their teaching.
This unwavering initiative to educate, share with, and seek out new followers, however,
was hampered by World War II, which broke out on December 7, 1941, when the
Japanese militia attacked Pearl Harbor, a U.S. naval base in Hawaii. Japan took over a
number of Southeast Asian countries, including the Philippines. The Japanese military
declared an end to the U.S. Commonwealth Republic in the Philippines on January 3,
1942, and imposed martial law afterward. All forms of communication, as well as all
means of education were put to a halt. President Manuel Quezon and U.S. Commander
Douglas MacArthur moved out of Manila and into a more provincial location. They were
forced to leave the country amidst continuing threats from the Japanese. A new
government was established by the Japanese, led by a Filipino, Jose P. Laurel (Agoncillo,
1990).
Under Japanese rule, the Philippines underwent turbulent times. The economy collapsed
and the country experienced a nationwide rice shortage. The United States launched an
air-raid on Manila in September 1944, reviving the war between the United States and
Japan. General MacArthur returned to the Philippines with his military troops in October
of the same year. By February 1945, the seat of government was once again turned over
to the Commonwealth Republic. Due to President Manuel Quezon’s early death, Sergio
Osmeña took his place as the new President of the Philippines (Agoncillo, 1990).
The Philippines was liberated from the Japanese officially on July 5, 1945. A month after
its liberation, an atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima and (p. 398) Nagasaki, Japan.
Japan surrendered unconditionally to the United States, and the World War officially
ended. There are very few records regarding any further progress or movement within
psychology in the Philippines during the war. There is evidence that Sinforoso Padilla’s
clinic operations were suspended during this period.
Page 5 of 31

Philippines
Post-World War II and the Furtherance of

Western Influences
The American government granted independence to the Philippines in 1946 and yet
American influences, values, and practices continued to pervade the political, economic,
cultural, and educational spheres. Most pervasive were the influences on the Filipinos’
mentality and language (Fernandez, 2006).
Licuanan (1985) referred to the post-war era as the “founding fifties (p. 16)” of
psychology in the Philippines, reflecting how the psychology departments and their heads
resumed the task of setting up new departments or (re)strengthening their previously
established departments. Estefania Aldaba-Lim (1917–2006) is recorded as being the first
Filipino to obtain a Ph.D. in clinical psychology from the University of Michigan. She set
up the psychology program at the Philippine Women’s University (PWU) and established
the Institute for Human Relations, the first recorded institute that concerned itself with
mental health. Aldaba-Lim then became one of the founders of the Philippine Mental
Health Association. By 1954, she had included education for mentally retarded children,
training programs for teachers, and teaching human relations for secondary schools as
part of the services extended by her institute. She was the first psychologist to set up a
psychology practicum laboratory in the Philippines, making the PWU the first institution
to offer a systematic practicum program for psychology in the Philippines (Bulatao &
Guthrie, 1968).
Within the same epoch, the Philippine government recognized the importance of having
guidance counsellors in public schools, leading psychologists to shift their attention to the
field of counselling (Bulatao & Guthrie, 1968). There was also an upsurge of academic
interest in the development of Philippine-oriented psychological materials (Guanzon-
Lapeña, et. al., 1998). This was also a time when Filipino psychologists became more
conscious of their responsibility to society rather than of their role and responsibility
within their discipline. With social relevance taking priority over the concern for
experimentation, psychology seemed to take on a more humanistic form and a more
realistic angle. This was quite contrary to what was happening in the West, where science
took prominence over human welfare (Felipe, 1969).
The decade of the 1960s saw the dominance of empiricism, experimental work, and the
positivistic approach to psychology in the Philippines, albeit in applied areas. Tiglao-
Torres (1997) noted that psychologists then relied heavily on correlations, and
experimental and objective approaches of theory-testing, and insisted on using statistics
to show relationships between variables. They also depended on procedural integrity for
establishing validity (Hoshmand & Polkinghorne, 1992, in Tiglao-Torres, 1997).
Psychologists began to shift their focus to the promotion of psychology as a discipline.
Research in the early part of the decade focused on psychological testing and
measurement, personality, and child development (Licuanan, 1985). A clear manifestation
Page 6 of 31

Philippines
of the widening interest in and reach of the field of psychological testing was the
establishment of testing centers. The Ateneo de Manila University (ADMU) established
the Central Guidance Bureau in 1961, with Fr. James Culligan, S.J. as its first director. In
addition to counselling services, this center offered testing services for employment and
research purposes for business clients. Aldaba-Lim founded the Philippine Psychological
Corporation in the same year.
A few more developments in academe occurred during the 1960s. Alfredo Lagmay (1919–
2005) received his Ph.D. in experimental psychology from Harvard University in 1960. He
became the chair of UP’s psychology department and remained in that position for 22
years (Licuanan, 1985). In 1962, Jaime Bulatao returned to the Philippines after receiving
a Ph.D. from Fordham University and established the department of psychology at ADMU
(Licuanan, 1985).
It was also during the 1960s that the Institute of Philippine Culture (IPC) was established,
based at ADMU, to focus on research on Philippine values. Two main volumes of work
were produced, one by Lynch (1961a) called Four Readings on Philippine Values and the
other by the Psychological Association of the Philippines (PAP) (1965) called the
Symposium of Filipino Personality (Tan, 1999). The IPC’s initial research focused on
understanding the factors that may have held back the Philippines from becoming a
developed and progressive nation. The Institute identified a number of Filipino values and
traits that supposedly explained the country’s lack of progress. These values include
pakikisama (going along with a group, smooth interpersonal relationships), bahala
(p. 399) na (fatalism) and the “crab mentality” (pulling down those who are successful),
and the strong family orientation of Filipinos. Another research project, conducted by
American psychologist Talcott Parsons, used five bipolar dimensions along which cultures
could be placed. The five bipolar items in his study were: affectivity vs. affective
neutrality (emotionality vs. objectivity), diffuseness vs. specificity (intertwined roles or
specific ones), particularism vs. universalism, quality vs performance, and collective vs.
self-orientation. According to his findings, the Philippines and all other developing
countries leaned toward the negative pole on the five dimensions, whereas the developed
countries fell under the more positive poles (Tan, 1997). Lawless and Tan (1968) and
Enriquez (1978, 1993) later criticized these IPC research projects in terms of
methodology and approach. This was a core target of “unpacking” undertaken by the
indigenization movement in the following decade.
The year 1962 proved to be a very significant and instrumental one for Philippine
psychology. It was in this year that the Psychological Association of the Philippines (PAP)
was founded by ten psychologists, including Sinforoso Padilla, Alfredo Lagmay (well-
known for developing a culture-fair thematic apperception test using drawings of
Philippine situations [Bulatao & Guthrie, 1968]), Jaime Bulatao, and Estefania Aldaba-
Lim. The three main goals of the PAP were to advance learning, teaching, and research in
psychology as a science; to advance the practice of psychology as an independent,
scientifically oriented, and ethically conscious profession; and to promote human welfare
(Tan, 1999). The establishment of the PAP was instrumental in encouraging psychologists
Page 7 of 31

Philippines
to pursue research consistently. The PAP’s annual conferences (held since 1962 either in
Metro Manila, the center of the Philippines, or in one of the provinces of the country)
became the venue for disseminating research findings and promoting the exchange of
ideas, and it served as a networking opportunity for professionals and students alike. The
PAP published the maiden issue of the Philippine Journal of Psychology (PJP) in 1968; it
contained 12 articles (Tan, 1999).
The year 1965 is also a significant year in Philippine history since it eventually affected
the development of Philippine psychology in a major way. Ferdinand Marcos, Jr. was
elected as Philippine President and became the first President to be reelected for a
second term in 1969. However, Marcos’ popularity declined shortly after his reelection
due to reports of massive corruption during his first term and cheating during the
reelection. His term was marked by an increase in militarization, corruption, and human
rights abuses. Nationalistic fervor returned in the 1970s, due mainly to poverty,
population growth, and an increasing crime rate. The writings of Claro M. Recto, Lorenzo
Tañada, Renato Constantino, and Jose W. Diokno were influential to the development of
nationalistic thought during this period (Fernandez, 2006). Militant groups took their
battles to the streets. Filipino psychologists joined the cause and marched alongside
students at demonstrations and rallies. Students from the UP led many of these rallies,
urging other Filipinos to show their nationalism and to reject the Marcos government.
It was also during the early 1970s when Virgilio Enriquez returned to the Philippines
after completing his Ph.D. in social psychology at Northwestern University in Illinois, in
the United States. Instead of imposing his new knowledge on his Filipino students, his
Western education actually drove him to become more Filipino-oriented in his teaching
and research in psychology (Pe-Pua & Protacio-Marcelino, 2000, 2002). He started to
conduct his classes in Filipino, and encouraged students to write and express in Filipino.
He started introducing the concept of Sikolohiyang Pilipino (Filipino psychology). He
criticized Western methods of psychology, claiming that such methods were not
appropriate in the Philippine setting and that adopting Western thought brought about
distorted views about the Filipino, perpetuated the colonization of the Filipino mind, and
furthered the miseducation of the Filipino people.
Amidst protests, violent dispersals and accusations of rampant graft and corruption,
Marcos declared martial law in 1972 and suspended a number of rights of common
citizens. Several protesters and opponents of the government were arrested and
imprisoned. The number of political detainees increased rapidly. Curfews were imposed,
and public assemblies were banned. As a result, political psychology emerged as a
relevant field. Psychologists concerned themselves with the relationship between
psychological processes and the political situations through studies on kinship and
political power, political socialization, social conflict, democratic transition, and public
opinion surveys (Montiel & Macapagal, 2000).
Page 8 of 31

Philippines
Martial Law and the Emergence of Nationalism

in Psychological Thought
Despite the turmoil of the martial law period, psychologists continued with their business
of developing (p. 400) a Filipino psychology amidst Western influences and national
political turmoil. Licuanan (1989) referred to this decade as the “relevant seventies” (p.
16), for this was the decade in which psychologists began to play a very pivotal role in
national development. In 1971, Aldaba-Lim, who served as the Secretary of Social
Welfare, became the ambassador for the United Nations Children’s Educational Fund
(UNICEF) (Tan, 1999). She placed human welfare as her top priority and emphasized this
by encouraging Filipino psychologists to apply their skills and knowledge for the
betterment of their fellow men. It was also during this time that the need for practicing
psychologists grew in number due to the rise in the number of overseas Filipino workers
(Tan, 1999). This eventually led to psychology becoming the most popular course and
degree major in the Philippines during the 1970s (Gines, 2006).
It was also during this decade that Enriquez strengthened his position on the importance
of developing a local indigenous psychology. Various “firsts” marked this era of Filipino
psychology including, among others, the first master’s thesis written in Filipino (1972),
and the first permanent graduate-level course on Filipino psychology at the UP in 1978
(Church & Katigbak, 2002). The 1970s saw the birth of the second duality in Filipino
psychology (Sikolohiyang Pilipino). Having been exposed to Western teachings, thought,
and methodology, Enriquez felt that these were too limiting as they did not recognize
cultural differences. He felt that Western psychology contributed to the colonial status of
the Filipino mind. For him, such a psychology was used merely to exploit the people, and
it failed to paint a real picture of who the Filipino truly was. He felt the need to extend
the definition of psychology from being merely the study of behavior and mental
processes to:
A study of emotions and experienced knowledge (kalooban and kamalayan),

awareness of one’s surroundings (ulirat), information and understanding (isip),
habits and behavior (diwa) and the soul (kaluluwa) as the way to learning about
people’s conscience. (Enriquez, 1976)
The definition was obviously more encompassing and more reflective of what is important
in understanding the Filipino’s overall makeup or psyche. The history, nature, and
contribution of Sikolohiyang Pilipino have been documented in a number of articles
(Church & Katigbak, 2002l Enriquez, 1992; Gastardo-Conaco, 2005; Pe-Pua & Protacio-
Marcelino, 2000, 2002, among others).
Sikolohiyang Pilipino’s primary emphasis was and continues to be on identity and

national consciousness, social awareness and involvement, language vis-a-vis psychology,
and Philippine culture. It continues to encourage psychologists to use cross-indigenous
Page 9 of 31

Philippines
methodologies and to adhere to a multilanguage, multimethod approach, as well as to the

use of appropriate field methods and the triangulation approach in research (Pe-Pua &
Protacio-Marcelino, 2000, 2002).
The indigenization framework used in developing Sikolohiyang Pilipino is one that favors
the discovery of behavior and thought processes from within the culture; that is,
indigenization from within. But the framework recognizes contributions from another
indigenization approach characterized by the translation of concepts and methods
(indigenization from without) (Enriquez, 1992). There has always been a tension between
these two approaches. This tension was slightly addressed by developments over the next
decades, when it would become clearer that, after indigenization efforts, the ultimate
goal of Sikolohiyang Pilipino is to contribute to universal psychology. (More discussion on
this further in the chapter.)
The beginnings of this second duality in Philippine psychology are clearly seen in the way
Enriquez opposed existing Philippine psychology fields at that time. He labelled industrial
and clinical psychology as being too Western and suggested that focus be shifted to
livelihood and health psychology. He encouraged students to do studies on Filipino folk
practices and healing techniques and to look into the lives and attitudes of Filipinos living
in rural areas. He pursued the development of a liberating, liberated, and
interdisciplinary kind of Filipino psychology (Pe-Pua & Protacio-Marcelino, 2000, 2002).
Enriquez established the Philippine Psychology Research House (PPRH) (which later
became the Philippine Psychology Research and Training House, PPRTH) that houses
more than 10,000 published and unpublished writings on Sikolohiyang Pilipino. In 1975,
he founded the Pambansang Samahan sa Sikolohiyang Pilipino (PSSP) (National
Association for Filipino Psychology), to coincide with the holding of the First National
Conference on Filipino Psychology in Manila. The PSSP continues to hold annual
conferences and to publish using the Filipino language (Pe-Pua & Protacio-Marcelino,
2000, 2002).
Enriquez, together with two other colleagues from UP, started to publish articles on
indigenizing (p. 401) Philippine concepts. The three big names constituting the
triumvirate of the indigenous movement are Enriquez, Zeus Salazar (a historian), and
Prospero Covar (an anthropologist) (Mendoza, 2006). Lagmay was also instrumental in
the development and encouragement of indigenization practices in the field of
psychology. They challenged existing literature on Philippine values, specifically those
published by the IPC in the early 1960s. Take, for instance, the concept of bahala na,
which was originally interpreted as fatalistic resignation or a “leaving-it-all-up-to-God”
type of attitude (Andres, 1994; Bostrom, 1968). Lagmay (1977) corrected this perception
and reported that bahala na was not fatalism but more of determination and risk-taking.
People who say “bahala na” are not adopting a passive attitude, but rather an active
attitude by telling themselves to be prepared for the upcoming difficult situations.
Another example of how Sikolohiyang Pilipino corrected colonial interpretations of local
attitudes and values was in redefining the concept of utang-na-loob. Kaut (1961) and
Page 10 of 31

Philippines
Hollnsteiner (1961) translated the term as “debt of gratitude,” a type of debt in which one
is expected to repay with interest. Enriquez corrected this notion by explaining that
utang-na-loob is simply gratitude and solidarity that binds one to one’s community or
country (Enriquez, 1977a; Pe-Pua & Protacio-Marcelino, 2000, 2002).
Another concept that caught Enriquez’s attention was pakikisama, which Lynch (1961b)
translated as smooth interpersonal relations by going along with a group or by
conforming with a group’s or with the majority’s decision. However, as Enriquez looked
more deeply into the Filipino language as a rich source of concepts meaningful for and
significant to the local culture (Enriquez, 1978), he discovered that pakikisama is merely
one of several levels and modes of interaction used by Filipinos. He then concluded that
pakikisama was not the core value or core concept highly valued by Filipinos. Rather, it is
kapwa (shared identity). Pakikisama is just one of the many levels embedded in the
concept of shared identity (Enriquez, 1977b). Thus, he theorized that Filipinos were not
concerned with maintaining smooth interpersonal relationships, but were more
concerned with pakikipagkapwa (or simply kapwa), which means treating the other
person as a fellow human being and identifying with him or her. Santiago and Enriquez
(1976) further refined this understanding when they identified eight levels of interactions
within kapwa. These levels are divided into two categories, the outsider (ibang tao) and
the insider or “one of us” (hindi ibang tao).
Category 1: “Ibang Tao” or Not One of Us
• Pakikitungo (transaction/civility with)

• Pakikisalamuha (interaction with)
• Pakikilahok (joining/participating with)
• Pakikibagay (in-conformity with or in-accord with)
• Pakikisama (being along with)
Category 2: “Hindi Ibang Tao” or One-of-Us
• Pakikipagpalagayang-loob (being in rapport/understanding/acceptance with)

• Pakiksangkot (getting involved)
• Pakikiisa (being one with).
Enriquez (1978; Santiago & Enriquez, 1976) stresses that the levels of interaction
mentioned above range from the relatively uninvolved civility in pakikitungo to the total
sense of identification in pakikiisa. According to Enriquez, the different levels show how
the concept of kapwa is not just its English translation, others. Kapwa is actually shared
identity. It is not just others but you and me together. It is not just them but we. Through
such an example, it then becomes clear why pakikisama should not be viewed entirely
negatively. Pakikisama is not just conformity. Pakikisama is the self being along with
others. The levels in pakikipagkapwa therefore emphasize equality with the other,
Page 11 of 31

Philippines
regardless of status in life. It implements the idea that people must treat one another as
fellow human beings (kapwa tao) and takes into account a regard for the dignity and well-
being of others.
One of Enriquez’s major contributions to Filipino psychology in general and to Filipino

personality in particular is the development of the Panukat ng Ugali at Pagkatao (PUP)
(Measure of Character and Personality) in 1975. This was refined further by Ma. Angeles
Guanzon. The test utilized dimensions of personality that were relevant to Filipinos. The
development of this test paved the way for the creation of more Filipino-oriented
personality tests, which are used in both corporate and clinical settings today.
A few other psychologists who supported Enriquez’s campaign for an indigenous

psychology emerged in the late 1970s. Rita Mataragnon argued for the use of a
multilanguage, multicultural approach and suggested that studies begin at the emic or
indigenous levels rather than at the etic or universal level (Mataragnon, 1979). Jaime
Bulatao (1979) focused his attention on developing different ways (p. 402) of
psychotherapy that are sensitive to the beliefs and practices of clients. He emphasized
the need to be more receptive when dealing with clients by being more intuitive and
contemplative, to the point of becoming less scientific (Bulatao, 1979). He did not mean
to say that psychologists had to give up the scientific dimension of their work; he simply
emphasized the need for psychology to take on a more human dimension. Annadaisy
Carlota focused her efforts on developing another tool for measuring Filipino personality,
the Panukat ng Pagkataong Pilipino (PPP) (Measure of Filipino Character).
The progress of Sikolohiyang Pilipino continued to exert influence on Philippine

psychology throughout the 1970s onto the 1980s. Its contribution in the area of
personality and psychological testing was prominent among its achievements. The
teaching of psychology was also influenced by Sikolohiyang Pilipino. Sikolohiyang Pilipino
was first taught as a subject at UP in 1978 by Jose Ma. Bartolome and taken over by
Rogelia Pe-Pua, a strong advocate of Sikolohiyang Pilipino who started her involvement in
the field as Enriquez’ undergraduate research assistant. She then became an academic
staff at the department of psychology at UP and was mentored by Enriquez. She put
together the first book of readings on the topic, entitled Sikolohiyang Pilipino: Teorya,
Metodo at Gamit (Filipino Psychology: Theory, Method and Application) (Pe-Pua, 1982,
1989, 1995). This continues to be used as a textbook in Sikolohiyang Pilipino and other
psychology subjects in universities and colleges where this is now being taught
(Enriquez, 1987, 1992). Two other compilations of readings added to the resources for
teaching Sikolohiyang Pilipino, namely Sikolohiyang Pilipino: Isyu, Pananaw at Kaalaman
(New Directions in Indigenous Psychology) (Aganon & David, 1985), and Indigenous
Psychology: A Book of Readings (Enriquez, 1990; Pe-Pua & Protacio-Marcelino, 2000,
2002).
It was also during the 1980s that Filipino historian Zeus Salazar articulated the four lines
of filiations of Philippine psychology—a significant development since it signalled clearly
how Philippine psychology has been in existence long before psychology as a discipline
Page 12 of 31

Philippines
came to the Philippines. In a nutshell, the first filiation, academic-scientific psychology,

refers to the dominant Western tradition, the birth of scientific psychology, and its
introduction to Philippine universities. The second filiation, academic-philosophical
psychology, is also part of the Western tradition and is mainly clerical. This was
prominent among students and professors at the Catholic-run University of Santo Tomas
and other higher-education institutions led by monks, preachers, and the Jesuits. The
third filiation is ethnic psychology, which is the major basis of Sikolohiyang Pilipino. This
includes indigenous psychology, psychology of Filipinos, and the practice of psychology by
Filipinos. The last filiation is the psychomedical system, with religion as both cohesive
element and explanation; for example, the local priests and priestesses and their theory
of disease and techniques of healing from the 1500s to the 1600s; Messianic movements;
and faith-healing in later years (Salazar, 1985).
Another major contribution of Sikolohiyang Pilipino is in the area of research methods. In

a recently published book chapter, Pe-Pua (2006) traced the history of the development of
indigenous methods in the Philippines, examined their application, and provided a
critique of these methods. To summarize, it was during the mid-1970s that Filipino
researchers started to explore indigenous approaches to doing research. Notably, they
tried the pakapa-kapa strategy (literally, “groping” as in “groping in the dark”) (Santiago,
1975) for discovering methods of gathering data that are attuned to the Filipino psyche.
The result is a range of methods such as pagtatanong-tanong or a semi-structured way of
interviewing (Gonzales, 1977; Pe-Pua, 1983, 1989, 2006), pakikipagkwentuhan or sharing
stories (De Vera, 1976), pagdalaw-dalaw (visiting), pakikipagpalagayang-loob (level of
mutual trust and rapport) (Gepigon & Francisco, 1978), and pakikisama (Nery, 1979) to
name only a few (for a full review, see Pe-Pua, 2006). Pe-Pua brought indigenous research
methods to the international arena when she published an article on pagtatanong-tanong
in the International Journal of Intercultural Relations in 1989. In that article, she
identified five guiding principles in the use of indigenous research methods: the
researcher–participants relationship influences the quality of data; said relationship must
be equal; participants’ welfare takes priority over data; research methods must be
appropriate to the population studied and conform with existing norms; and the language
used in research must be that of the participants (Pe-Pua, 1989, 2006; Pe-Pua & Protacio-
Marcelino, 2000, 2002).
Enriquez, Salazar, Covar, Pe-Pua, and others “succeeded in radicalizing, de-colonizing,

rejuvenating, making relevant and re-inventing psychology in the Philippines” (Protacio-
de Castro, included in Allwood & Berry, 2006, p. 252).
Returning to the sociopolitical context, the economy of the Philippines continued to

stagger, (p. 403) and the political situation turned for the worse when once-exiled
Philippine Senator Benigno Aquino Jr.3 was allowed to return to the country from the
United States on August 21, 1983. Upon his arrival, he was assassinated by a gunman on
the tarmac of Manila International Airport. His assassination brought millions and
millions of Filipinos back to the streets, clamoring for change in the Marcos government.
A snap election was held in which Marcos was pitted against the widow of the ex-senator,
Page 13 of 31

Philippines
Corazon Aquino. The Commission on Elections declared Marcos the winner, but reports
regarding massive cheating again sent Filipinos to the streets of EDSA amidst threats to
their lives. Filipinos bravely stood in front of armored tanks, faced heavily armed soldiers,
and stood behind rows upon rows of barbed wire. The demonstrations eventually pushed
the Marcoses out of the Presidential Palace Malacañang as Aquino was sworn into office.
A new era in Philippine life began as democracy was restored.
Page 14 of 31

Philippines
Post-EDSA Revolution and Psychology:

Treading the Path of Peace and Progress
As the Aquino government slowly tried to revive the ailing economy at the dawn of the
1990s, psychologists did their share in helping the Filipino people—especially those who
had become victims of abuse or oppression—regain their lives. Psychologists took part in
efforts to counsel freed political detainees and their families. They assisted with post-
traumatic stress disorder in victims of the earthquake in 1990, and following the Mt.
Pinatubo eruption and the great floods in Ormoc, which both happened in 1991 (Gines,
2006). The number of clinical practitioners and hypnotherapists increased. Bulatao
(1987) even noticed the existence of three forms of hypnosis practised at that time:
Western forms, local forms of altered consciousness associated with spirits, and a
combination of both, which he called “Shamanistic hypnosis” (1987, p. 163). He believed
this combination was the most effective form to help clients pursue a path of inner peace.
Sikolohiyang Pilipino was not free from criticism, even in its early stage of emergence and
during the 1990s (see for example, Bernardo, 2009; Church & Katigbak, 2002; Salazar,
2000; San Juan, 2006; Sta. Maria, 1996 & 2000). One of its weaknesses, as pointed out by
Sta. Maria (1996, 2000) was the nonelaboration of the method of “phenomenological
reinterpretation” used by Enriquez in coming up with his concept of pakikipagkapwa. She
also mentioned that Enriquez was too reactive to what had already been published and
adopted a perspective that was pangkami (culture-bearers explaining their psychology to
others) rather than pantayo (culture-bearers exploring their psychology among
themselves). Sikolohiyang Pilipino was accused of dwelling too much on slogans, not
providing room for peer review, and lacking a culture of research.
There were also criticisms of the indigenous research approach, but followers of
Sikolohiyang Pilipino persevered with their phenomenological and qualitative approach.
In addressing issues of validity and reliability, they offered triangulation and the use of a
variety of methods in gathering data as required.
A void was created by the untimely demise of Enriquez in 1994. Pe-Pua, who was
earmarked to take over the daunting task of continuing his legacy, had migrated to
Australia. Nonetheless, she continued to support the movement, published an article
documenting the contribution of Sikolohiyang Pilipino (Pe-Pua & Protacio-Marcelino, 2000,
2002), and contributed a book chapter on indigenous research methods in the Philippines
(Pe-Pua, 2006). She also taught pakapa-kapa and pagtatanong-tanong to her students of
research methods at the University of New South Wales. The torch for furthering the
advancement of Sikolohiyang Pilipino was passed on to Grace Aguiling-Dalisay (Gastardo-
Conaco, 2005), who is known as the second UP graduate (the first being Danilo Tuazon)
to defend her dissertation in the Filipino language (Aguiling-Dalisay, personal
communication, January 25, 2009). She was supported by other former students and
colleagues of Enriquez, such as Elizabeth Protacio-Marcelino, Ma. Angeles Guanzon-
Page 15 of 31

Philippines
Lapeña, Flordeliza Lagbao-Bolante (1956–2011), and Jay Yacat. They formed the new
generation of leadership in Sikolohiyang Pilipino. They took turns in heading the PSSP,
continued organizing the annual conferences in Sikolohiyang Pilipino, operated the
PPRTH, and published emerging papers in the field. They published the first monograph
of the series Binhi (literal translation is “seed”), featuring the translation of Pe-Pua and
Protacio-Marcelino’s article on the history of Sikolohiyang Pilipino (Pe-Pua & Protacio-
Marcelino, 2002).
During the late 1980s, a certain amount of tolerance for the existence of both schools of
thought, Western psychology and Sikolohiyang Pilipino, seemed to emerge, brought about
mainly by changes in the sociopolitical context of the country. With the tolerance came an
acceptance of common problems (p. 404) and challenges shared by the two dualities.
Primary among those challenges was how to encourage the growing number of
psychology graduates to get into research and publication and to develop more of what
Licuanan (1985) called the “theorizing practitioner” (p. 17).
Just as the psychologists of the time faced numerous daunting tasks during the late 1980s
to the early 1990s, so did the Aquino government. Apart from the numerous natural
disasters mentioned earlier, the government had to face six coup attempts (Montiel &
Macapagal, 2000). All these served to hamper the efforts of the Aquino government in
developing programs that would help the flailing economy. Aquino then endorsed Fidel
Ramos as the next presidential candidate. Ramos was sworn in as the new President in
1992, and by 1994, the Philippines started to experience economic growth.
Dramatic growth was likewise experienced in the field of political psychology. When
democracy was restored in 1987, studies began to focus on voting behavior, political
influences of the church, political personalities, peace psychology, and related issues.
Examples of studies as enumerated by Montiel and Macapagal (2000) include Filipino-
style electoral behavior in which candidates are somewhat “anointed” as the chosen one
by the outgoing president (as in the case of President Ramos being “anointed” by
Aquino). Studies on voting behavior indicate that voters chose candidates on the basis of
personality, shared identity, and affiliation with show business, rather than on the basis of
issues.
The 1990s saw the emergence of two new influences on Philippine social science:
postmodernism and feminism (Tiglao-Torres, 1997). Postmodernists reject the idea of
universality and emphasize the need for local, specific, and historically informed analysis
grounded on culture and the lived experiences of people. Postmodernists accept the idea
of subjective experiences, and they believe that the meanings derived from the language
used and the sociohistorical context in which it takes place, defines what is experienced.
Feminists, on the other hand, challenge patriarchy, recognize that structures in society
put women in subordinate positions, and call for equity and gender equality (Tiglao-
Torres, 1997). Indigenous-feminist research methodologies likewise started to surface,
such as the use of ginabayang talakayan (focused group discussions) in sexuality research
(Aguiling-Dalisay, 1997). These two new influences emphasize meaning as opposed to
Page 16 of 31

Philippines
methods and cognitive processes. A number of studies in psychology did focus on the
ideas of postmodernists and feminists, especially research on gender issues, migration,
abused women and children, and phenomenological studies on particular groups in
society (such as garbage collectors, children living in dump sites, security guards,
teachers, etc.), topics that fall under the broader field of social psychology.
Challenges of the 21st Century: Indigenization,

Globalization, and Professionalization
After Ramos’ successful term of office, movie actor Joseph Estrada emerged victorious in
the Presidential race of 1998. Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo became Estrada’s Vice-President.
In 2001, EDSA II broke out due to rampant graft and corruption involving Estrada.
Estrada stepped down from office in order to avoid bloodshed, and Arroyo was sworn in
as his successor. She finished the term that Estrada started and stayed in power until
2004. During the 2004 elections, she was reelected, but not without protests from the
opposing camp of another actor-presidential candidate, Fernando Poe, Jr. Poe was very
popular among 70% of the Filipino population, so his losing the election was not taken
lightly. However, on December of the same year, Poe suffered a heart attack and passed
away. Nonetheless, this did not stop the demonstrations and rallies asking for the
impeachment of Arroyo amidst accusations of massive fraud in the 2004 elections and
charges of graft and corruption. However, due to disorganization and the lack of a clear
focus and leadership from the opposing camps, Arroyo remained in the top seat of the
country until 2010.
In the midst of the challenges besetting the country’s political and economic spheres,
psychologists have worked consistently in trying to professionalize their practice. Efforts
to regulate the practice of guidance counsellors, clinical psychologists, and
psychometricians have been pursued continuously by the heads of various organizations
such as the PAP and the Integrated Professional Counselors Association of the
Philippines. Other organizations include the Philippine Association for Counsellor
Education, Research and Supervision, and the Association of Psychological and Education
Counselors of Asia (Church & Katigbak, 2002). Republic Act No. 9258 was passed in
2004. Otherwise known as the Guidance and Counseling Act of 2004, the law set forth the
qualifications, standards of practice, code of ethics, competencies, licensure (p. 405)
requirements, and minimum curricula required by practicing guidance counsellors in the
field. Another defining moment came in Philippine psychological history when the first
licensure examinations for guidance counsellors took place on August 21–22, 2008.
Another effort at regulating the practice of psychology was the Republic Act 10029, more
commonly known as the Philippine Psychology Act of 2009, that was signed into law on
March 16, 2010, after three decades of advocating by the PAP. Passed by both houses of
Congress and Senate and signed into law by then President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo, the
Page 17 of 31

Philippines
law serves to protect the public by ensuring that all psychologists and psychometricians
undergo and pass a licensure exam prior to the practice of their profession. Conversely,
the law seeks to protect licensed psychologists and psychometricians and differentiate
them from other persons who claim to provide psychological counseling. (A copy of the
law may be viewed at www.pap.org.ph).
A new Code of Ethics for Philippine Psychologists (2009) was also ratified by the Board of
Directors of the PAP in 2009. The Code of Ethics remained unchanged since the 1980s yet
in the year 2008, efforts were made to revise and update it to include the practice of the
growing variety of psychologists in the country (retrieved from http://www.pap.org.ph).
The urgency or continuing advocacy shown concerning the passage of the Guidance and
Counseling Act of 2004, the Philippine Psychology Act of 2009, and the Code of Ethics for
Philippine Psychologists (2009) attests to the fact that counselling and clinical work
remain the dominant forms of psychological practice in the Philippines (Montiel & Teh,
2004). The second most popular field is industrial-organizational psychology. A large
number of psychologists in academe either teach on the side or do therapy on the side.
Then there are those who are active in government and nongovernmental organizations,
as well as those who are involved in social work. Overall therefore, psychologists seem to
be able to cut across different and varying fields and even serve the needs of those who
are in other fields.
The licensure and regulation of the practice of psychology in the Philippines are closely
linked to educational practice. Tan (1999) observes that the qualitative improvement in
teaching has lagged behind the quantitative growth of the student population. The
creation of the Commission on Higher Education served to address this problem. Thus
far, despite challenges due to lack of resources and funds, the psychology departments at
different universities continue to thrive. The attrition rate has been noted to be high at
the postgraduate level, and it is suggested that proper advisement and regular follow-up
take place to address the problem (Tan, 1999).
Challenges such as low pay, and having to compete with unethical or incompetent
practitioners and quacks are slowly being addressed through the passage of the new bills
passed in the congress and senate and by establishing guidelines based on research (see
Teh, 2003) regarding the level of professional fees one can charge. The lack of good
psychological tests has been addressed locally, as evidenced by the development of more
than 200 psychological tests and measurements (see Guanzon-Lapeña et. al., 1998).
Locally developed tests for use in the professional, educational, and corporate fields are
made available through various corporations such as the PPRTH, MAVEC Specialists
Foundation, Inc., and Asian Psychological Services & Assessment Corporation, among
others. According to Guanzon-Lapeña (Personal communication, December 14, 2008),
there is no one local test distributor. There are many modes by which tests are
distributed, including direct contact with the authors of the tests, or the organizations or
universities that serve to distribute the tests.
Page 18 of 31

Philippines
Among the over 130 universities and colleges in the Philippines that offer psychology
degrees, three universities stand out in terms of performance and high profile in research
and publication. They are the De la Salle University (DLSU), ADMU, and the UP
(Bernardo, 2002). A number of factors can explain this. First, many of the academic staffs
in these universities have received advanced training, many of them from overseas.
Second, they have the resources for supporting research and other scholarly activities.
Third, there are more pressures on them to publish, unlike with other universities and
colleges where teaching (and clinical practice in some) is the only expectation of
academic staff. In terms of field of research, Bernardo (1997) observed that social
psychology has consistently been the field in which research predominates. This reflects a
commitment among Filipino psychologists to work on areas that are of interest or
significance to the Filipino people and society. This trend has made a number of writers
conclude that Philippine psychology is leaning more and more toward an indigenous
orientation (Aguiling-Dalisay, 2008; Bernardo, 2009; Sta. Maria, 1996).
Research and publication also started to involve collaborations of Filipino

(p. 406)
psychologists with psychologists in other countries and with professionals from other
disciplines such as anthropology and history (see Mendoza, 2006). This continues the
interdisciplinary collaboration witnessed even from the early days of Sikolohiyang
Pilipino. For instance, Salazar, a historian, continues to teach at the DLSU, where he has
trained undergraduate students to do verbatim transcriptions in the native language. He
also continues to publish his writings in Sikolohiyang Pilipino using the Philippine
language.
Other forms of collaboration and mutual cooperation in Philippine psychology also

emerged during the 21st century. Conferences sponsored by the Society for Adolescent
Medicine in the Philippines, Inc. (SAMPI) and the Psychiatrists’ Associations have been
broadcasted and are open to practitioners in the field of psychology. The PAP created the
PAP Junior Associates arm to keep undergraduate students up-to-date on developments in
different fields of psychology in the Philippines.
Another fact worth mentioning is that the PAP is among the founding members of the
Afro-Asian Psychological Association established in 1990. Together with nine other
psychological associations, the PAP set out to establish the Asia-Oceania Psychological
Association in 1992. The PAP has also hosted a number of international conferences in
the country since 1995 (Tan, 1999).
To date, both the PAP and the PSSP continue to hold annual conferences. The PAP
continues to publish the PJP, while the PSSP publishes monographs such as Binhi (since
2002) and textbooks such as Mga Babasahin sa Agham Panlipunang Pilipino (Readings in
Philippine Social Science) (Navarro & Lagbao-Bolante, 2007).
Page 19 of 31

Philippines
Conclusion
This chapter traced the development of Philippine psychology within a sociopolitical
context. The first period of the introduction of academic-scientific psychology coincides
with the American occupation of the country and the formalization of a Western
educational system, after a long history of Spanish colonization, up to the events of World
War II. This period saw the establishment of psychology departments in a few universities
by Filipino psychologists trained in the Western tradition. The second period covers the
“founding fifties” characterized by the strengthening of psychology teaching and
practice, and the 1960s, characterized by a shift of focus to social problems and issues,
and a strengthening of the discipline. It was during the 1960s that the PAP and the IPC
were established. The period coincided with brewing turmoil in Philippine politics as
people and the Marcos government clashed. The third period brought this turmoil to a
height that pushed Philippine psychology toward a nationalistic character and saw the
emergence of Sikolohiyang Pilipino, an indigenous perspective in the discipline. An
increased awareness of the limitations of Western psychology led to a paradigm shift that
resulted in the discovery of Filipino psychological concepts and methods. This saw the
development of indigenous personality research and of indigenous research methods in
the 1970s and its strengthening, as well as debates in the 1980s. The fourth period covers
the mid-1980s to the early 1990s, when Philippine politics tried to consolidate toward
peace and progress, and Philippine psychology saw the influence of postmodernism and
feminism. The fifth and last period covers the contemporary preoccupation with
professionalizing psychology (with two significant bills in the offing) in the 21st century,
the challenges of globalization, and the need for collaboration, as Filipinos face the
challenges of a new generation of political unrest and economic uncertainty.
The historical development of Philippine psychology is flavored by the duality between

Western psychology and indigenous Filipino psychology. Both have their merits and
weaknesses. For a long time, Western psychology has dominated and it continues to be a
strong force, as can be gleaned from the teaching curriculum in Philippine universities
and colleges. The experimental method and the positivist orientation are still quite
strong. However, Western psychology still faces its biggest criticism—that its theories are
wanting in terms of reflecting local realities, and its methods are not always useful in
understanding Filipino psychological thought and behavior.
It is for this reason that the second duality emerged. Sikolohiyang Pilipino aims to provide
a process for making psychology relevant by distancing itself from its colonial (Western)
character. Bernardo (2009, p. 2) asserts that Sikolohiyang Pilipino’s greatest
accomplishment is that it “liberated Philippine psychology from its colonial past and its
neo-colonial present.” It has also influenced positivists and etic practitioners to pause,
take a step back, review Western methodologies and theories, and question their validity,
reliability, and applicability to the Philippine setting and to the (p. 407) Filipino people.
No doubt, because of Sikolohiyang Pilipino, the majority of psychologists in the
Page 20 of 31

Philippines
Philippines are now coming up with different ways and means of localizing,
contextualizing, and indigenizing their topics, their means of doing research, and even
their manner of analyzing data. Despite the criticisms against it, Sikolohiyang Pilipino
continues to have a strong hold on Philippine psychology, especially among those who
believe that, for psychology to be truly Filipino, it must be about Filipinos and must be
expressed in the language best understood by Filipinos.
It has been observed that psychologists representing the dualities have now been more
accepting of each other and have recognized the major contributions of each side. Where
university departments were once beset by factions within, between the Western and
indigenous psychologists, this has been replaced by cooperation and mutual respect.
Even between PAP and PSSP, there is mutual participation and mutual interest in sharing
ideas and innovations. Although the criticisms of each other’s orientations and
approaches continue, these have always been civil and constructive. This is pakikisama
(being along with) at its best and pakikipagkapwa (having a shared identity) at its finest.
Future Directions
A number of issues face Philippine psychology in the future. A few of these are outlined
here.
Bernardo (1997) noted from his survey of publications in Philippine psychology that the
research culture in Philippine psychology is weak. He attributed this to lack of research
resources, lack of time for research due to the heavy teaching load of most academics,
“an absence of a critical mass of researchers that are necessary to initiate and maintain a
peer review system of research outputs,” (p. 48) and a lack of openness for review.
Bernardo recommended that institutions create or strengthen this research culture in
their own universities/corporations so as to serve as models for other institutions and
individuals. He also believed that associations such as the PAP must play an important
role in increasing the number of individuals doing and publishing research by providing
the proper venues for dissemination and discussion of research. He likewise reiterated
the need for Filipino researchers to take on a more active role in developing substantive
and functional knowledge about the psychological life of Filipinos (Bernardo, 1997). To
this can be added that, coupled with more resources (for example, research funding and
teaching relief) there should be clear reward systems attached to increased research and
publication productivity, whether this is in terms of material resources or recognition
(e.g., academic promotion). Montiel and Teh (2004) reaffirmed this challenge to publish
more regularly. Furthermore, they would like to see some standardization of curricula
across universities and colleges, more collaboration with international colleagues or
groups, and more interdisciplinary and multidisciplinary approaches in research, so that
the results of such research would have a greater impact on Philippine society and on the
Asian as well as wider global community.
Page 21 of 31

Philippines
The second major issue is about theorizing in Philippine psychology. Sikolohiyang Pilipino
has prospered for more than three decades, yet the question remains as to whether it has
indeed made a significant contribution to or inroad in the discipline of psychology in
terms of theory and methodology. Has psychology in other parts of the world changed
because of indigenous psychology? A recent analysis of the origins and development of
indigenous psychologies (IPs) in various regions of the world by Allwood and Berry (2006)
showed that many IPs (including the Philippine experience) endeavor to contribute to
universal psychology. As with the Philippine case, the lack of great visibility in the
international arena poses a disadvantage in forming an adequate recognition of
Sikolohiyang Pilipino’s contribution. Furthermore, as an offshoot of constraints in
publishing, whether in English or in Filipino, no conscious attempt has been made to
consolidate its achievements in various fields, in terms of the contribution. Thus, a clear
future direction must take stock of the status of Philippine psychology in theorizing and
methodology by looking at the origins and development by field (i.e., in personality, social
psychology, child psychology, clinical psychology, and so on). The original goal of
Sikolohiyang Pilipino is to provide one form to compare with others, ultimately moving
toward a universal psychology. Enriquez (1979, 1992) refers to this as the cross-
indigenous approach. The aim was never about isolating psychology or being insular. The
need for theorizing has been expressed by a number of writers (Bernardo, 2009; Church
& Katigbak, 2002; Gastardo-Conaco, 2005; Pe-Pua & Protacio-Marcelino, 2000, 2002;
Yacat, 1997, among others). Gastardo-Conaco (2005) recommends that the body of
knowledge that has been created on Sikolohiyang Pilipino be synthesized, so that theories
can be refined and further tested and validated.
The third issue is one that has emerged within the Sikolohiyang Pilipino
(p. 408)
movement and is related to the inclusivity–exclusivity dimension of carrying out

indigenization research and consequently, publishing. This is the tension between the
pantayo perspective (the insider view representing “us”–tayo and excluding “them,” sila)
(Pe-Pua & Protacio-Marcelino, 2000, 2002) and the pangkami perspective (the culture-
bearer speaking to the outsider about the indigenous) perspectives. For Salazar (1991,
2000), the pantayo approach is sufficient to understanding Filipino thoughts, to
developing indigenous knowledge, and to addressing social issues effectively, through the
use of the local language. He did not believe in a need to construct indigenous knowledge
with a view of explaining this to the outsider since this additional task could hamper the
full development of the indigenous knowledge. As Sta. Maria (1996) puts it, the pangkami
approach tends to portray Sikolohiyang Pilipino to be too reactive, rather than
integrative. In terms of the future, it seems likely that this debate will resolve itself
through reconciliation, in which both perspectives could progress side by side without
creating a contradiction. The pantayo approach is crucial for solidifying indigenous
knowledge and the contributions of Philippine psychology. When this is done, the
pangkami approach could become the vehicle for bringing indigenous knowledge to the
next step, which is cross-cultural comparison following a cross-indigenous approach.
Page 22 of 31

Philippines
Much has been said about the role that Sikolohiyang Pilipino has played in the
development of psychology in the Philippines. As one of the most advanced movements in
the world in indigenization, it is this aspect that makes psychology in the Philippines
quite distinct. In terms of the future direction of Sikolohiyang Pilipino, Church and
Katigbak (2002) offered seven pressing needs of indigenous Philippine psychology: “the
formulation of indigenous theory; objective consideration informed by empirical data;
continuing development and validation of indigenous measures; systematic investigation
of the comparative and convergent validity of various indigenous and imported research
methods; institutional/structural improvements leading to growth and stability of the
indigenous research culture; maintenance of an appropriate balance between the pursuit
of an independent psychology and the avoidance of insularity; and eventually, increased
efforts to relate cross-indigenous approach toward a universal psychology” (p. 141).
To conclude, psychology in the Philippines will continue to flourish. There will be more
collaboration with colleagues from other countries and from other disciplines, and most
certainly, collaborations between Western-trained Filipino psychologists and indigenous
framework–oriented psychologists. As more universities make it a requirement of their
academic staff to publish more actively, an increase in the number of publications can be
expected. The younger fields, such as political psychology, peace psychology, and health
psychology, will progress, as evidenced by the growing numbers of practitioners in the
field. Psychotherapists, social psychologists, and industrial-organizational psychologists
will continue to promote and work toward the welfare and well-being of the Filipino
people.
Glossary
Babaylans: Filipino native priestesses and healers who practiced the earliest forms of
psychotherapy.
Ginabayang talakayan: The indigenous research method of focused group
discussions.
Hindi-ibang-tao: One-of-us; level of relationship established with participants/
respondents, characterized by being in rapport/understanding and acceptance, with
being one with the other.
Ibang-tao: Not-one-of-us; level of relationship established with participants/
respondents characterized by being in civility with the other, to a level of being along
with the other.
Ilustrado: Refers to the Filipinos during the time of the Spanish colonization in the
Philippines who were educated.
Indigenization from within: Looking for indigenous psychology from within the
culture itself, also known as cultural revalidation.
Page 23 of 31

Philippines
Indigenization from without: Translation of concepts and methods into a particular

language to make it more culturally appropriate.
Kapwa: Shared identity
Katipunan: Or the KKK (Kataas-taasang Kagalang-galangang Katipunan ng mga Anak
ng Bayan), an organization established by a Filipino, Andres Bonifacio, to lead the
Filipinos into an uprising against the Spaniards.
Pagtatanong-tanong: The indigenous research method of interviewing, or a semi-
structured way of interviewing.
Pakikipagkwentuhan: The indigenous research method of sharing stories.
(p. 409)
Sikolohiyang Pilipino: Filipino psychology; a field of psychology, introduced by

Virgilio Enriquez, which emphasized identity and national consciousness, social
awareness and involvement, and language in relation to culture and Philippine culture.
It encourages the use of the multilanguage, multimethod approach in doing research.
Further Reading
Further Reading
Bernardo, A. (2002). Finding our voice(s): Philippine psychologists’ contributions to

global discourse in psychology. Asian Psychologist, 3(1), 29–37.
Church, A., & Katigbak, M. (2002). Indigenization of psychology in the Philippines.

International Journal of Psychology, 37(3), 129–148.
Montiel, C., & Teh, L. (2004). Psychology in the Philippines. In M. Stevens, & D. Wedding
(Eds.), Handbook of international psychology (pp. 467–480). East Sussex: Brunner and
Routledge.
Pe-Pua, R. (2006). From decolonizing psychology to the development of a cross-

indigenous perspective in methodology: The Philippine experience. In U. Kim, K. S. Yang,
& K. K. Hwang (Eds.), Indigenous and cultural psychology: Understanding people in
context (pp. 108–137). New York: Springer.
Pe-Pua, R., & Protacio-Marcelino, E. (2000). Filipino Psychology: A legacy of Virgilio G.

Enriquez. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 3, 49–71.
References
Aganon, A., & David, M. (Eds.) (1985). Sikolohiyang Pilipino: Isyu, pananaw at kaalaman
(New directions in indigenous psychology). Manila: National Bookstore.
Page 24 of 31

Philippines
Agoncillo, T. (1990). History of the Filipino people (8th ed.). Quezon City: Garotech
Publishing.
Aguiling-Dalisay, G. (1997). Ginabayang talakayan: Notes from sexuality research. In S.

Guerrero (Ed.), Feminist research experience: A casebook. Quezon City: University
Center for Women’s Study, UP.
Aguiling-Dalisay, G. (2008). Sikolohiyang Pilipino: Evolving a culturally appropriate

psychology discipline in the Philippines. Contribution to the Plenary symposium on
Psychological perspectives on social identity and indigenization, 45th Psychological
Association of the Philippines Annual Convention, Aug 14–16, 2008, Davao City,
Philippines.
Allwood, C., & Berry, J. (2006). Origins and development of indigenous psychologies: An
international analysis. International Journal of Psychology, 41(4), 243–268.
Andres, T. (1994). Dictionary of Filipino culture and values. Quezon City: Giraffe Books.
Bernardo, A. (1997). Psychology research in the Philippines: Observations and prospects.

Philippine Journal of Psychology, 30, 39–58.
Bernardo, A. (2002). Finding our voice(s): Philippine psychologists’ contributions to

global discourse in psychology. Asian Psychologist, 3(1), 29–37.
Bernardo, A. (2009). Culture and Philippine psychology: Progress and prospects. In M. L.

T. Camagay (Ed.), Pi Gamma Mu Diamond Lectures (pp. 31–50). Quezon City: Pi Gammu
Mu International Honor Society in Social Science, Philippine Alpha Chapter.
Bernardo, A., Posecion, O., Reganit, A., & Rodriguez-Rivera, E. (2005). Adapting the
social axioms survey for Philippine research: Validating Filipino and English versions.
Philippine Journal of Psychology, 38, 77–100.
Bostrom, L. (1968). Filipino bahala na and American fatalism. Siliman University Journal,
51, 399–413.
Bulatao, S. J., J. (1979). Oh, that terrible task of teachers to teach psychology in the
Philippines. Philippine Journal of Psychology, 12(1), 35–40.
Bulatao, S. J., J. (1987). Hypnosis in the Philippines. In The Phenomena of consciousness

(pp. 160–163).
Church, A., & Katigbak, M. (2002). Indigenization of psychology in the Philippines.

International Journal of Psychology, 37(3), 129–148.
Code of Ethics for Philippine Psychologists (2009). Retrieved from http://

www.pap.org.ph on 05 June 2011.
Constantino, R. (1975). The Philippines: A past revisited. Quezon City: Tala Publications.
Page 25 of 31

Philippines
De Vera, G. (1976). Pakikipagkuwentuhan: Paano kaya pag-aaralan ang pakikiapid? In

Sikolohiyang Panlipunan sa kontekstong Pilipino, compiled by V. Enriquez. Later
published in R. Pe-Pua (Ed.), Sikolohiyang Pilipino: Teorya, metodo at gamit [Filipino
Psychology: Theory, method and application] (1982, reprinted 1989 & 1995; pp. 187–
193). Quezon City: Surian ng Sikolohiyang Pilipino.
Enriquez, V. (1976). Sikolohiyang Pilipino: Perspektibo at direksiyon. In L. Antonio, E.

Reyes, R. Pe, & N. Almonte (Eds.), Ulat ng Unang Pambansang Kumperensya sa
Sikolohiyang Pilipino (1976: pp. 221–243). Quezon City: Pambansang Samahan sa
Sikolohiyang Pilipino. Later included in R. Pe-Pua (Ed.), Sikolohiyang Pilipino: Teorya,
metodo at (p. 410) gamit [Filipino Psychology: Theory, method and application] (1982,
reprinted 1989 & 1995; pp. 5–21). Quezon City: Surian ng Sikolohiyang Pilipino. Also
included in A. Navarro, & F. Lagbao-Bolante (Eds.), Mga babasahin sa agham
panlipunang Pilipino: Sikolohiyang Pilipino, pilipinolohiya at pantayong pananaw (2007;
pp. 3–22). Quezon City: C & E Publishing, Inc.
Enriquez, V. (1977a). Filipino psychology in the third world. Philippine Journal of

Psychology, 10(1), 3–18.
Enriquez, V. (1977b). Pakikisama o pakikibaka: Understanding the psychology of the

Filipino. Paper presented at the Conference on Philippine Culture.
Enriquez, V. (1978). Kapwa: A core concept in Filipino social psychology. Philippine Social
Sciences and Humanities Review, 42(1–4), 100–108.
Enriquez, V. (1979). Towards cross-cultural knowledge through cross-indigenous methods

and perspectives. Philippine Journal of Psychology, 12, 9–15.
Enriquez, V. (1987). Decolonizing the Filipino psyche: Impetus for the development of
psychology in the Philippines. In G.H. Blowers, & A.M. Turtle (Eds.), Psychology moving
East: The status of Western psychology in Asia and Oceania (pp. 265–287). Boulder and
London: Westview Press.
Enriquez, V. (Ed.). (1990). Indigenous psychology: A book of readings. Quezon City:

Akademya ng Sikolohiyang Pilipino, Philippine Psychology Research and Training House.
Enriquez, V. (1992). From colonial to liberation psychology: The Philippine experience.

Quezon City: University of the Philippines Press.
Enriquez, V. (1993). Developing a Filipino psychology. In U. Kim, & J. Berry (Ed.),

Indigenous psychologies: Research and experience in cultural context (pp. 152–169).
Newbury Park, London: Sage Publications.
Felipe, A. (1969). The Filipino psychologist and the third world of psychology. Paper
presented at the 6th annual convention of the Psychological Association of the
Philippines.
Page 26 of 31

Philippines
Fernandez, E. (2006). Decolonizing the Filipino: Cultural intellectual revolution in

contemporary Philippines. Paper presented at the Asian Youth Culture Camp: Doing
Cultural Spaces in Asia.
Gastardo-Conaco, M. C. (2005). The development of a Filipino indigenous psychology.

Philippine Journal of Psychology, 38(2), 1–18.
Gepigon, S., & Francisco, V. (1978). Pagdalaw at Pakikipagpalagayang-loob sa mga

mamumulot ng basura. In R. Pe-Pua (Ed.), Sikolohiyang Pilipino: Teorya, metodo at gamit
[Filipino Psychology: Theory, method and application] (1982, reprinted in 1989 & 1995;
pp. 194–202). Quezon City: Surian ng Sikolohiyang Pilipino. Part of the paper entitled
“Ang mamumulot ng basura: Ang kanilang patuloy na paghihirap at mga saloobin at
mithiin sa buhay. In L. Antonio, R. Pe, & B. Villanueva (Eds.), Ulat ng Ikatlong
Pambansang Kumperensya sa Sikolohiyang Pilipino (1978: pp. 133–146). Quezon City:
Pambansang Samahan sa Sikolohiyang Pilipino.
Gines, A. (2006). Teaching undergraduate psychology in the Philippines. International

Journal of Psychology, 41(1), 51–57.
Gonzales, L. (1977). Ang pagtatanung-tanong: Dahilan at katangian. In R. Pe-Pua (Ed.),

Sikolohiyang Pilipino: Teorya, metodo at gamit [Filipino Psychology: Theory, method and
application] (1982, reprinted in 1989 & 1995; pp. 175–186). Quezon City: Surian ng
Sikolohiyang Pilipino.
Guanzon-Lapeña, M., Church, A., Carlota, A., & Katigbak, M. (1998). Indigenous
personality measures: Philippine examples. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 29(1),
249–270.
Hollnsteiner, M. (1961). Reciprocity in the lowland Philippines. Quezon City: Ateneo de

Manila University.
Kaut, C. (1977). Utang-na-loob: A system of contractual obligation. Southwestern Journal

of Anthropology, 17, 256–272.
Lagmay, A. (1977). Bahala na. In L. Antonio, E. Santos, E. Reyes, & M. Paguio (Eds.), Ulat
ng Ikalawang Pambansang Kumperensiya sa Sikolohiyang Pilipino [Proceedings of the
Second National Conference on Filipino Psychology] (pp. 120–130). Quezon City:
Pambansang Samahan sa Sikolohiyang Pilipino.
Lawless, R., & Tan, A. (1968). A construction of two cross-cultural studies. Lipunan, 1, 30–
37.
Licuanan, P. (1985). Psychology in the Philippines: History and current trends. Philippine
Studies, 33(1), 67–86.
Lynch, F. (Ed.) (1961a). Four readings on Philippine values. Quezon City: Ateneo de
Manila University Press.
Page 27 of 31

Philippines
Lynch, F. (1961b). Social acceptance. In F. Lynch (Ed.), Four readings on Philippine values
(pp. 1–21). Quezon City: Ateneo de Manila University Press.
Mataragnon, R. (1979). The case for an indigenous psychology. Philippine Journal of

Psychology, 12(1), 3–8.
Mendoza, S. (2006). Theoretical advances in the discourse of indigenization. In Between

the homeland and the diaspora: The politics of theorizing Filipino and Fil-American
identities: A second look at the post-structuralism-indigenization debates (2nd ed.). New
York: Routledge.
Montiel, C., & Macapagal, M. (2000). Political psychology in the Philippines. Philippine
Journal of Psychology, 33(2), 1–32.
Montiel, C., & Teh, L. (2004). Psychology in the Philippines. In M. Stevens, & D. Wedding
(Eds.), Handbook of international psychology (pp. 467–480). East Sussex: Brunner and
Routledge.
Navarro, A., & Lagbao-Bolante, F. (Eds.). (2007). Mga babasahin sa agham panlipunang
Pilipino: Sikolohiyang Pilipino, pilipinolohiya at pantayong pananaw (pp. 3–22). Quezon
City: C & E Publishing, Inc.
Nery, L. (1979). Pakikisama as a method: A study of a subculture. In R. Pe-Pua (Ed.),

Sikolohiyang Pilipino: Teorya, metodo at gamit [Filipino Psychology: Theory, method and
application] (1982; pp. 203–208). Quezon City: Surian ng Sikolohiyang Pilipino. Part of a
paper entitled “The covert subculture of male homosexual prostitutes in Metromanila”,
Philippine Journal of Psychology, 12(1), 27–32.
Ocampo, A. (1998, March 22). Biak-na-Bato: A chronology. Philippine Daily Inquirer, p.1.
Padilla, S., & Aldaba-Lim, E. (1961). Psychology in the Philippines. Science Review, 6–10.
Pe-Pua, R. (Ed.). (1982, reprinted 1989 & 1995). Sikolohiyang Pilipino: Teorya, metodo at
gamit [Filipino Psychology: Theory, method and application]. Quezon City: Surian ng
Pe-Pua, R. (1983). Pagtatanong-tanong: A potential method for cross-cultural research. In

V. Enriquez (Ed.), Indigenous psychology: A book of readings (pp. 231–249). Quezon City:
Akademya ng Sikolohiyang Pilipino.
Pe-Pua, R. (1989). Pagtatanong-tanong: A cross-cultural research method. International

Journal of Intercultural Relations, 13, 147–163.
Pe-Pua, R. (2006). From decolonizing psychology to the development of a cross-

(p. 411)
indigenous perspective in methodology: The Philippine experience. In U. Kim, K. S. Yang,

& K. K. Hwang (Eds.), Indigenous and cultural psychology: Understanding people in
context (pp. 108–137). New York: Springer.
Page 28 of 31

Philippines
Pe-Pua, R., & Protacio-Marcelino, E. (2000). Filipino psychology: A legacy of Virgilio G.

Enriquez. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 3, 49–71.
Pe-Pua, R., & Protacio-Marcelino, E. (2002). Sikolohiyang Pilipino: Pamana ni Virgilio G.

Enriquez. Binhi, 1(1). Monograph series of the Pambansang Samahan sa Sikolohiyang
Pilipino.
Salazar, Z. (1985). Four filiations in Philippine psychological thought. In A. Aganon, & M.

David (Eds.), Sikolohiyang Pilipino: Isyu, pananaw at kaalaman (New directions in
indigenous psychology) (pp. 194–214). Manila: National Bookstore.
Salazar, Z. (1991). Ang pantayong pananaw bilang diskursong pangkabihasnan (The

pantayo perspective as cultural discourse). In V. Bautista, & R. Pe-Pua (Eds.),
Pilipinolohiya: Kasaysayan, pilosopiya at pananalisksik (Philippine Studies: History,
philosophy and research) (pp. 46–72). Manila: Kalikasan Press.
Salazar, Z. (2000). The pantayo perspective as a discourse towards kabihasnan. Southeast

Asian Journal of Social Sciences, 28(1), 123–152.
San Juan, E. (2006). Towards a decolonizing indigenous psychology in the Philippines:

Introducing Sikolohiyang Pilipino. Journal for Cultural Research, 10(1), 47–67.
Santiago, C. (1975). Pakapa-kapa: Paglilinaw ng isang konsepto sa nayon. In R. Pe-Pua

(Ed.), Sikolohiyang Pilipino: Teorya, metodo at gamit [Filipino Psychology: Theory, method
and application] (1982, reprinted 1989 & 1995; pp. 161–170). Quezon City: Surian ng
Santiago, C., & Enriquez, V. (1976). Tungo sa makapilipinong pananaliksik. Sikolohiyang

Pilipino: Mga Ulat at Balita, 1(4), 3–10.
Sta. Maria, M. (1996). Is the indigenization crisis in Philippine social sciences resolved in
Sikolohiyang Pilipino? Layag, 1(1), 101–120.
Sta. Maria, M. (2000). Indigenous psychology, ethnopsychology, cross-cultural psychology

and cultural psychology: Distinction implications for Sikolohiyang Pilipino. Asia-Pacific
Social Science Review, 1(1), 11–22.
Tan, A. (1997). Values research in the Philippines. Philippine Studies, 45(4), 560–569.
Tan, A. (1999). Philippine psychology: Growth and becoming. In L. Teh, & E. Macapagal
(Eds.), Readings in general psychology (pp. 19–38). Quezon City: Ateneo de Manila
University Press.
Teh, L. (2003). A survey on the practice of psychotherapy in the Philippines. Philippine

Journal of Psychology, 36, 112–133.
Tiglao-Torres, A. (1997). Methods, mind or meaning: Shifting paradigms in Philippine

psychology. Philippine Journal of Psychology, 30, 17–38.
Page 29 of 31

Philippines
Yacat, J. (1997). The place of Sikolohiyang Pilipino in a generalist psychology. Sikolohiya,

1(1), 66–70.
Zaide, G., & Zaide, S. (1999). The Philippines: A unique nation (4th ed.). Quezon City: All
Nations Publications.
Notes:
(1.) The Epifanio de los Santos Avenue is a major thoroughfare in Metro Manila. On
February 22–25, 1986, this highway served as the nonviolent “battleground” between
millions of Filipinos and the Philippine military. The military was sent there with tanks,
hand grenades, and armed weapons by the Marcos government. The people, mainly
supporters of would-be president, Corazon Aquino, were armed with rosaries, prayers,
religious statues, and flowers. The military’s heavy artillery proved weak against these
weapons of the people. Marcos and his family left Malacañang Palace and headed to
Hawaii, and Aquino assumed the presidency. The event is henceforth referred to as
People Power I or the EDSA Revolution.
(2.) Benigno Aquino, Jr., popularly known as Ninoy, married Corazon Cojuangco in 1954.
He entered politics at the age of 22 and subsequently became the youngest mayor,
governor, and senator to serve in the Philippines. Imprisoned in 1972, when President
Marcos declared martial law, Aquino was allowed to move his family to the United States,
so that he could undergo heart surgery. He later served as a research fellow at Harvard
University and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. In 1983, he returned to Manila
from “exile.” Despite high security, he was assassinated as he deplaned on August 21.
Although an investigative commission declared that several military allies of Marcos were
responsible for the assassination, all defendants were acquitted in a 1985 trial. (http://
encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761560871/benigno_aquino.html)
(3.) Padilla’s PhD thesis is entitled “Further Studies on the Delayed Pecking of
Chicks” (http://www.lsa.umich.edu/psych/welcome/PsychDeptHistory.pdf).
Rogelia Pe-Pua
Rogelia Pe-Pua, School of Social Sciences and International Studies, The University
of New South Wales.
Pia-Anna Perfecto-Ramos
Pia-Anna Perfecto-Ramos, Department of Psychology, Ateneo de Manila University.
Page 30 of 31

Philippines
Page 31 of 31

Pe-Pua Perfecto-Ramos (2012) - Highlighted

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Pe-Pua Perfecto-Ramos (2012) - Highlighted

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Philippines

Oxford Handbooks Online

Abstract and Keywords

Keywords: Academic-scientific, Filipino psychology, Sikolohiyang Pilipino, indigenization

Subscriber: Freie Universitaet Berlin; date: 23 January 2019

other succeeding generations. Examples of these include the collection of Philippine

The Spanish-Catholic and American

Subscriber: Freie Universitaet Berlin; date: 23 January 2019

Subscriber: Freie Universitaet Berlin; date: 23 January 2019

Psychology was already being taught to undergraduate students by professors from

Subscriber: Freie Universitaet Berlin; date: 23 January 2019

Subscriber: Freie Universitaet Berlin; date: 23 January 2019

Post-World War II and the Furtherance of

Subscriber: Freie Universitaet Berlin; date: 23 January 2019

Subscriber: Freie Universitaet Berlin; date: 23 January 2019

Subscriber: Freie Universitaet Berlin; date: 23 January 2019

Martial Law and the Emergence of Nationalism

A study of emotions and experienced knowledge (kalooban and kamalayan),

Sikolohiyang Pilipino’s primary emphasis was and continues to be on identity and

Subscriber: Freie Universitaet Berlin; date: 23 January 2019

methodologies and to adhere to a multilanguage, multimethod approach, as well as to the

Subscriber: Freie Universitaet Berlin; date: 23 January 2019

Category 1: “Ibang Tao” or Not One of Us

• Pakikitungo (transaction/civility with)

Category 2: “Hindi Ibang Tao” or One-of-Us

• Pakikipagpalagayang-loob (being in rapport/understanding/acceptance with)

Subscriber: Freie Universitaet Berlin; date: 23 January 2019

One of Enriquez’s major contributions to Filipino psychology in general and to Filipino

A few other psychologists who supported Enriquez’s campaign for an indigenous

The progress of Sikolohiyang Pilipino continued to exert influence on Philippine

Subscriber: Freie Universitaet Berlin; date: 23 January 2019

came to the Philippines. In a nutshell, the first filiation, academic-scientific psychology,

Another major contribution of Sikolohiyang Pilipino is in the area of research methods. In

Enriquez, Salazar, Covar, Pe-Pua, and others “succeeded in radicalizing, de-colonizing,

Returning to the sociopolitical context, the economy of the Philippines continued to

Subscriber: Freie Universitaet Berlin; date: 23 January 2019

Subscriber: Freie Universitaet Berlin; date: 23 January 2019

Post-EDSA Revolution and Psychology:

Subscriber: Freie Universitaet Berlin; date: 23 January 2019

Subscriber: Freie Universitaet Berlin; date: 23 January 2019

Challenges of the 21st Century: Indigenization,

Subscriber: Freie Universitaet Berlin; date: 23 January 2019

Subscriber: Freie Universitaet Berlin; date: 23 January 2019

Research and publication also started to involve collaborations of Filipino

Other forms of collaboration and mutual cooperation in Philippine psychology also

Subscriber: Freie Universitaet Berlin; date: 23 January 2019

The historical development of Philippine psychology is flavored by the duality between

Subscriber: Freie Universitaet Berlin; date: 23 January 2019

Subscriber: Freie Universitaet Berlin; date: 23 January 2019

movement and is related to the inclusivity–exclusivity dimension of carrying out

Subscriber: Freie Universitaet Berlin; date: 23 January 2019

Subscriber: Freie Universitaet Berlin; date: 23 January 2019

Indigenization from without: Translation of concepts and methods into a particular

Sikolohiyang Pilipino: Filipino psychology; a field of psychology, introduced by

Bernardo, A. (2002). Finding our voice(s): Philippine psychologists’ contributions to

Church, A., & Katigbak, M. (2002). Indigenization of psychology in the Philippines.

Pe-Pua, R. (2006). From decolonizing psychology to the development of a cross-

Pe-Pua, R., & Protacio-Marcelino, E. (2000). Filipino Psychology: A legacy of Virgilio G.

Subscriber: Freie Universitaet Berlin; date: 23 January 2019

Aguiling-Dalisay, G. (1997). Ginabayang talakayan: Notes from sexuality research. In S.

Aguiling-Dalisay, G. (2008). Sikolohiyang Pilipino: Evolving a culturally appropriate

Bernardo, A. (1997). Psychology research in the Philippines: Observations and prospects.

Bernardo, A. (2002). Finding our voice(s): Philippine psychologists’ contributions to

Bernardo, A. (2009). Culture and Philippine psychology: Progress and prospects. In M. L.