1

POLITICAL PSYCHOLOGY
A Whig History

WILLIAM F. STONE

Introduction
Vico observed in 1725 that "governments must conform to the nature of the
men governed" (Allport, 1968). There has actually been no shortage of
speculation about the psychological sources of political acts in recorded
history. We find the ancient counterpart of genetic constitutional theories
in Plato's "myth of the metals," in which men were seen to be hereditarily
disposed toward either courage or the appetites, or toward rational thought.
The roots of modern discussions of reward and punishment, of motivation,
and of political cognition can be found in Machiavelli's writing. Community
psychology, participation, and like topics have parallels in Greek thought
concerning the polis and the nature of citizenship.
Psychological conceptions of political man, then, have been current
for a long time.· The explicit application of modern psychological theory
to political life is quite recent, however, and the historical research neces-
sary to establish the interconnections between the developing fields of
modern psychology and political behavior has not been completed. Thus,
the present account represents the author's own perspective on the develop-
ment of political psychology in the twentieth century. The emphasis through-
out will be on the contribution of psychology to this joint undertaking. As
we look back at the past, then, the account of political psychology's origins

WILLIAM F. STONE • Department of Psychology, University of Maine, Orono, Maine

04469.

1
2 WILLIAM F. STONE

is un~eniably presentist; 1 in the last two decades, the volume of research and
theory has been so great that considerable subjectivity enters into the choice
of work deserving mention.
Most "political psychology" has been done by members of disciplines
other than psychology, but the present emphasis on psychological perspec-
tives may be useful to the better definition of an as-yet incompletely iden-
tified field of study. Inevitably, many important contributions of those
political scientists and sociologists who have done so much to shape the
present discipline will receive acknowledgment, but much more research
and study will be necessary before a definitive history of the field can be
written.
The present historical account will begin with a rather general defini-
tion of political psychology, followed by a listing of the psychological pro-
cesses which seem relevant to the enterprise. Then mention will be made
of a few of the discipline's premodern intellectual predecessors. The second
section, "The Dawn of Modern Psychology," traces some of the important
developments in psychology since 1900 which bear on political behavior.
The third part, on the emergence of political psychology in the 20th cen-
tury, bears witness to Harold Lasswell's preeminence in the field but sug-
gests that Graham Wallas has a prior claim to the foundership. J. F. Brown
serves as a stand-in for all of those contributors who will be named when
a more definitive search for the origins of political psychology is accom-
plished. The fourth section begins the chronological survey of developments
in the field; the chronological divisions and the fanciful titles of this and
the following three sections are not meant to imply well-documented eras,
but serve simply as an organization that seems appropriate as a first approxi-
mation toward understanding the rapid development of political psychology
in the United States. As Greenstein (1973) has noted, the "pluralistic uni-
verse" which constitutes political psychology does not easily submit to an
organizational outline.
Traditionally, political psychology has been conceived as the search for
personalistic determinants of political action. These determinants include
both aspects of the person (personality, attitudes, intelligence, interests, etc.,
see Stone, 1974, p. 54) and those aspects of the behavioral environment
which serve as stimuli for the person's actions. Political behavior, in other
words, is explained "by extracting analytically two classes of inferred, re-

lIn this context, "presentism" refers to history written from the standpoint of the present with
little attempt to understand the situation as experienced by the actors of the past. Presentism
as opposed to historicism, and the origins ofthe term "whig history," are discussed by Stocking
(1965). The present account by no means represents careful historical study of the field, but
is intended as a personal overview which may challenge others to the labor of more serious
historical scholarship.
POLITICAL PSYCHOLOGY 3

constructed determinants: features of the situation of action, and inferred

dispositions or properties of the behaving person" (Smith, 1973, p. 58).
In addition to considering the psychology of the political actor, it is also
possible to conceive of a political psychology which focuses on the effects
on the individual of exposure to a particular political event or on the long-
term effects of living in a particular political system. Almond and Verba's
(1965) work can be seen in this light, as they discuss the perceptions of people
living in a particular political culture. Another example of this second po-
litical psychology is the Lewin, Lippitt, and White (1939) study ofthe effects
of differing leadership climates on behavior. These two perspectives on the
relation of politics to psychology are imaginatively captured in the follow-
ing quote from Hyman (1973):
Examining politics from the perspective of psychology is somewhat
like the task of the subject in old-fashioned experiments who was shown
a picture where figure and ground kept reversing themselves in his
perception. The political psychologist faces a similar situation, although
it has not been so apparent to him. He too can reverse his normal rigid
perspective. Instead of looking at politics only as the figure against a
background of psychological variables from which it emerges, he can
focus on the psychological as the figure against a background of the
political system that has shaped it. The study of the relation between
psychology and politics can move in both directions .... A political
system can invade and alter our psyches, just as it can reflect our prior
dispositions. (pp. 354-355)
A comprehensive definition of political psychology, then, must include
both (I) the contribution of psychological processes to political behavior,
and (2) the psychological effects of ambient political systems and events-
one of the most important conditions of our existence being the social-
political culture within which we live.
What are the psychological processes which have figured most prom-
inently in explanations of political acts? A good place to begin is with the
man who, more than any other, could be termed the father of American
psychology. William James (1892/1961) listed in his chapter titles most of
the processes that are considered important in psychology today, leaving
aside structural and physiological approaches and the study of animal
behavior. These processes include motivation (habit, instinct, will), con-
sciousness (attention, the self, the stream of consciousness), emotion, think-
ing (conception, discrimination, association, the sense of time, memory,
and imagination, reasoning), perception, and behavior (habit, conscious-
ness and movement). Missing from these topics, for modems, is that of
"personality" and "psychodynamics." James might say, were he here today,
that political psychologists of the past were too single-minded in their devo-
4 WILLIAM F. STONE

tion to Freudian and neoanalytic approaches. However, there are good

reasons for this focus on depth psychology, which will become apparent
as the present account proceeds.
Personality is a major concern of political psychologists today, al-
though political psychology is now turning increasingly to social-psycho-
logical approaches. Social psychology will be given somewhat short shrift
in the present account, however. In addition to its bias toward psychology,
the present review also has further restrictions: It is concerned mainly with
American work, and the emphasis is on empirical work done in the 20th
century. Given this modern American slant, it is appropriate to begin with
a small bow to the intellectual predecessors of political psychology.

Some Intellectual Predecessors of Political Psychology

Still of great modern significance are the writings of Niccolo Machi-
avelli (1513/ 1955). The Prince is a sort of tract on successful leadership;
its significance today is not in the cruel practices he saw as necessary, but
in his theories concerning human nature and the motivations of those who
seek to control other people. Christie and Geis (1970) recount, in Studies
in Machiavelliansim, the observations that led Christie to consider Machi-
avelli's work of potential signficance for studying modern man and the very
distinctive differences in behavior between people who share Machiavelli's
philosophy and those who do not.
Thomas Hobbes is another predecessor of modern thought; his pes-
simistic view of political man and his life as "nasty, brutish, and short" has
few counterparts in modern theory, but may hit closer to the experiences
of people in some underdeveloped nations today than the musings of po-
litical scientists more comfortably ensconced in modern society. Besides
having some communality with Freud's more pessimistic writings on psy-
chology and society, Hobbes's thought anticipated modern conceptions of
systems theory, social-psychological approaches, and the like. His depiction
of the social organism has parallels in the contemporary concern with the
connections among individuals social networks, primary ties, and reference
groups.
John Locke's writings on government and society can also be seen as
influential in shaping present conceptions of political psychology. His as-
sertion of the mind as tabula rasa (blank slate) at birth can be discerned in
John B. Watson's emphasis on the primacy of experience over innate deter-
minants, and the continuing disparagement of "human nature" explana-
tions in psychology. In his treatises on government, Locke set forth a ra-
tional view of society, in which humans order their affairs according to the
social contract. Such a view of society upheld reason and moderation as
POLITICAL PSYCHOLOGY 5

the crowning virtues of human relationships, foreshadowing modem liberal

democratic traditions.
In Rousseau, we find yet another thread which has been woven into the
modem fabric of political psychological ideas. Rousseau believed that man
is best left alone; that natural man is in his highest state. The ideas of
Rousseau resonate with those of the principled conservative, the libertarian,
the environmentalist, and the organic farmer today. Psychologically,
Rousseau contrasted with Locke because of the former's emphasis on an
inborn human nature, a stance as abhorrent to Locke as to modem psy-
chology. If Hobbes's was the pessimistic view of human nature, Rousseau's
was the optimistic one-uncorrupted by society, humankind's lot is a state
of happy innocence. Locke, contrary to both, saw the individual and in-
dividual consciousness as being shaped by the environment, a stance most
compatible with the views of Marx.
Karl Marx's impact on psychology has been slight, partly because of the
provincialism of the discipline, and partly because of the inherent conser-
vatism of a new discipline trying to emulate the physical sciences. While
there was an interest in Communism among psychologists during the 1930s,
the actual examination of Marxian ideas has lagged far behind psychology's
sister social sciences. A Marxian-oriented social psychology text, Psychol-
ogy and the Social Order (Brown, 1936), had an impact on one generation
of students, but the politically chilling effect of the cold war and the
McCarthy era stifled further work along these lines. Probably the greatest
impact of Marx on psychological thought has come through the interpreta-
tions of Erich Fromm. In Marx's Concept of Man, Fromm (1961) stressed
the humanistic side of Marx, a side that has appeal today to other humanistic
psychologists. Some modem scholars (e.g., McBride, 1977), however, at-
tribute Marx's humanism to his earlier writings, suggesting that his mature
thought was more tough-minded. In any event, we can see in Marx some
foreshadowing of modem psychological conceptions of political man. If,
indeed, Marx did have some conception of a fixed human nature, this
human essence was neither limiting nor predetermining.

The Dawn of Modern Psychology

Psychology, as we know it today, has a more schizophrenic character
than its sister disciplines. Since it is both a biological and a social science,
psychology is sometimes rent by this major division. Yet, in the main, re-
searchers in the two disciplines are compatible; they seem more able to
unite in common cause against the practitioners of clinical psychology.
There is a common theme that unites psychologists and differentiates them
from their social science colleagues, and that theme is research and, in par-
ticular, experimentation.
6 WILLIAM F. STONE

Wilhelm Wundt
Narrowing our focus somewhat to the two subdisciplines of psychology
of most immediate relevance to politics, social psychology and personality,
we can trace psychology's divergence from the speculative roots common
to all social science. The development of the elaborate empirical and posi-
tivistic epistemology which differentiates psychology from other disciplines
begins with Wilhelm Wundt, who is credited with establishing in 1879 in
Leipzig the first laboratory for psychological studies. His contribution to
social psychology, however, was more speculative than empirical. An enor-
mously prodigious writer, Wundt completed, toward the end of his career,
a ten-volume Folkpsychology, or social psychology (see Wundt, 1916). Few
today have read the work in its entirety; its significance lies in its impor-
tance to Wundt in completing his psychology, which ranged from study
and writing on physiology, to physiological psychology, through the study
of mental contents and operations, to his Folkpsychology, the study of
psychology and society.
The influential figures in psychology around the turn of the century
were mostly trained in physiology or medicine. Wundt was trained in physi-
ology and held the chair in that discipline at Leipzig. William James and
William McDougall, two other founding fathers, were trained as physicians.
Morton Prince, who founded the Journal of Abnormal Psychology in 1906,
was an MD (as were all the members of his first editorial board). Early con-
tributors to the Journal included Ernest Jones and Carl Jung, both physi-
cians. Prince, Jones, and Jung were all to try their hands at the application
of psychology to politics through psychological studies of historical
personages.

William James
Although many others were active in the 1880s and 1890s, William
James is widely acknowledged as the father of American psychology. His
Principles of Psychology, published in 1890, defined the field and con-
tributed many basic psychological insights. James was instrumental in setting
up a laboratory at Harvard, but he was most interested in demonstrations
of the type pursued in physiology laboratories and was never an experi-
mentalist. Thus, James's (1890) insightful writing remained firmly within
the speculative tradition, although his work was informed by a knowledge
of the physiological bases of behavior and by prior developments in psy-
chological research. James's contribution might be said to be in the gathering
together of the insights and folk wisdom on psychological processes to his
day. This is not to say that many of his insights are not relevant today, as
the following will demonstrate.
POLITICAL PSYCHOLOGY 7

Two themes will suffice to reveal the relevance of James's theorizing

for present-day problems. These are his emphasis on consciousness and his
discussion of habit. He himself made the connection between habit and
political psychology. "Habit," he said, "is thus the enormous fly-wheel of
society, its most precious conservative agent. It alone is what keeps us all
within the bounds of ordinance, and saves the children of fortune from the
envious uprisings of the poor. It alone prevents the hardest and most repul-
sive walks of life from being deserted by those brought up to tread therein
... in most of us, by the age of thirty, the character has set like plaster,
and will never soften again" (1892, pp. 143-144). Therein we have a plausible
psychological explanation for the sometimes amazing lack of revolutionary
fervor expressed by the downtrodden, long preceding the theories of rela-
tive deprivation and the like.
James's discussion of thinking and the stream of consciousness is
likewise of significance, whether juxtaposed to present-day theories of
political choice or to Marxist thought on the determinants of consciousness.
Also of relevance is James's discussion of the self and the basis of self-esteem
(1892, Chap. 12), because of the importance that self-esteem has assumed
through the theorizing of Lasswell and modern personality theorists.
If James and Wundt emphasized what today would be called cognitive
psychology, dynamic theories of motivation were also emerging in the early
1900s. Freud, of course, is best known, particularly to those approaching
political psychology from the political and historic side. Of great importance
in the same era, however, was William McDougall, whose theories of human
instinct represented a much broader view of human motivation than Freud's.

Psychoanalysis and the Instincts

Psychoanalysis, it goes without saying, has been the dominant influence
on psychological thought about abnormal behavior until recently. The
Journal of Abnormal Psychology, from its founding in 1906, contained
increasing references through the twenties to and discussions of personality
interpretations from the perspective of Freudian theory. Harold Lasswell
established the tradition of combining psychological insight with one's
political interests through involvement in a training analysis, and even
today, many political scientists and historians pursue that route. The ap-
peal of psychoanalysis is easy to understand: The theory combines dramatic
insights concerning the functioning of the human psyche with a plausible
model of human personality structure and an explanation for otherwise
mysterious personality functioning. The hysteric personality, for instance,
was one of the first psychological disorders to be thoroughly explored by
Freud.
8 WILLIAM F. STONE

Freud's (1905/1963) analysis of the case of Dora exemplifies his at-

tempts to understand the psychic origins of an 18-year-old girl's hysterical
symptoms. The dynamics are by no means simple-unconscious sexual
feelings toward her father, her father's mistress, and the latter's husband
are all intertwined, as is the patient's guilt about masturbation. Freud
stressed the idea of overdetermination of symptoms in this case fragment:
Dora's symptoms have multiple causes. Often overlooked is the complex
detail with which Freud would elaborate the social context of the patient's
problems. (Also see Maddi, 1974, on Dora's "victimization.")
Freud was also interested in the social and political implications of
the psychodynamic insights derived from his psychotherapeutic practice.
His ideas on the origin of society were set forth in Totem and Taboo (1913/
1953-1966). In this work, he elaborated on the idea of the "primal horde"
(the primitive form of society as a horde ruled by a powerful male despot)
suggested by Darwin. Ten years later, in Group Psychology (1922/1951),
Freud discussed the libidinal ties which provide the foundation for human
social groups. This book emphasized positive feelings of love as the basis
for attachment to the leader and of the identification of members with one
another. In Civilization and Its Discontents (1930/1961), he turned to the
hostile feelings harbored by humanity-the aggressive instincts which soci-
ety strives to control and regulate. To Freud, the repression of both sexual
and aggressive instincts was necessary for the progress of civilization, an
idea which has been dealt with at length by Marcuse (1959), who introduced
the notion of surplus repression. Both Marcuse and Reich (1933/1970)
accepted Freud's instinctual tendencies, but differed with him (and each
other) as to the necessity for social repression of these impulses.

William McDougall
McDougall was also a physician, but his psychology was not derived
from the analyst'S couch. Rather, his work followed the academic tradition
in psychology, and was clearly influenced by Darwin's theory of evolution.
Although McDougall's (1908) theory of social behavior, which made human
instincts central explanatory constructs, was later derogated as an over-
simplified and circular explanation of behavior, his writings were actually
in the best tradition of sophisticated naturalistic observation, demonstrated
today by the ethologists. McDougall named a large list of instincts, and
his explanation of their mode of operation stimulated many others to use
instincts as constructs for explaining human social behavior. Soon there
was a negative reaction to instinct theory (see Allport, 1924), in part result-
ing from a parallel movement in psychology that better expressed American
hopes and aspirations. Nourished in the soil of Dewey and James, the be-
haviorists were the legitimate heirs of these pragmatists.
POLITICAL PSYCHOLOGY 9

Behaviorism
John Broadus Watson is often called the father of behaviorism. The
appellation is unwarranted in the light of the contributions of Pavlov and
Thorndike, to name but two scientists who contributed to the early perspec-
tive which took such strong root in American psychology. Nonpsycholo-
gists, particularly political scientists to whom behaviorism or "behavioral-
ism" connotes a psychological perspective on their subject matter, have
difficulty comprehending the revolutionary impact of behaviorism on psy-
chology. Watson is best known as the popularist ofthe movement; he carried
Locke's notion of tabula rasa to its logical extreme, in that he admitted no
causative factors other than the physiological structure of the organism
and the physical stimuli which impinged on it. Learning, for Watson, was
the formation of conditioned reflexes. To him, the malleability ofthe human
being is practically unlimited, as seen in his famous dictum:

Give me a dozen healthy infants-and I'll guarantee to take anyone

at random and train him to become any type of specialist I might select
-doctor, lawyer, artist, merchant-chief and yes, even beggar-man and
thief. (Watson, 1925, p. 85)

Behaviorism, considered by its adherents to be the only scientific psy-

chology, was to split into two streams as the century wore on. One stream,
led by B. F. Skinner, has been termed "radical behaviorism" owing to its
shunning of mentalistic concepts and its rejection of motivational con-
structs. The second stream of behaviorism, generally identified with Clark
Hull and secondarily with his student Kenneth Spence, includes such writers
as E. L. Thorndike and E. C. Tolman. This second stream emphasized the
use of a theoretical approach called the "hypothetico-deductive method,"
which included emphasis on hypothetical internal motivational states and
in Tolman's case cognitive constructs; this approach contrasts with the
"black box" approach of the radicals. Some ideas of the Hull-S pence school
have been taken into psychopolitical formulations (e.g., Eysenck's, 1954,
theory of political attitudes), but Skinner's positions are directly relevant
to political psychology; the implications of both streams of behaviorism will
be considered further in a later section (pp. 13-20). One additional figure
should be mentioned at this point, however, in view of the importance of
social psychology to the present context.
Floyd Allport, brother of Gordon Allport, was one of the earliest ex-
perimental social psychologists; he is credited with the achievement of
applying the behaviorist perspective in social psychology. Mainly through
his influential book Social Psychology (1924), Allport enunciated the ways
in which the science of social psychology could be rigorously pursued
through measurement, observation, and experimentation-beginning a
10 WILLIAM F. STONE

tradition still strong in the discipline today. Of particular interest are All-
port's observations on crowd behavior, his formulation of the process he
called "social facilitation," and some of the earliest studies of conforming
behavior. His interest in the political implications of social psychology
was indicated in the title he suggested for the chair which he assumed at
the Maxwell School of Syracuse University in 1924: Professor of Social
and Political Psychology. According to Katz (1979), Allport "taught the
first courses ever offered in political psychology."

Political Psychology Emerges In the Twentieth Century

Political psychology stands at the intersection of two disciplines: psy-
chology and political science. There is clear agreement among those who
have written historical overviews (e.g., Greenstein, 1973) that Harold
Lasswell deserves recognition as a primary founder of this interstitial field.
Davies (1973a) characterized Lasswell as "the first to enter the psychological
house of political ill repute, establish a liaison, and sire a set of ideas and
influences of great vitality" (p. 18). But however great Lasswell's impact,
there seem to be clear grounds for citing Graham Wallas's precedence as
the founder of modem political psychology. In fact, Lasswell had attended
lectures given by Wallas and others at the London School of Economics
in 1923-1924 (Marvick, 1977, p. 24).

Graham Wallas
The designation of Graham Wallas's influence as primary in the devel-
opment of political psychology is based on his book, Human Nature in
Politics, which was first published in 1908 and reprinted several times.
A. L. Rowse terms the book "the most original and important contribution
to be made to political thought by an Englishman in this century" (Wallas,
1908/1948, p. 1). Wallas's work was important because he dealt with "im-
pulse and instinct in politics," as well as with rational decision and choice.
A Fabian political activist, Wallas had an intimate firsthand knowledge of
politics that enriched his psychological characterizations. In addition to
numerous citations of political philosophers, such as Locke, who had put
forth psychological hypotheses, Wallas cited such psychologists of his day
as G. Stanley Hall, William James, and Lloyd Morgan. Perhaps of greatest
importance in Wallas's work is his discussion, at a time when Freud's
theories were only beginning to become known to the world, of irrational-
ism in political life. Freud was probably not yet known to Wallas at the
time he first wrote Human Nature, as he would most certainly have noted
POLITICAL PSYCHOLOGY 11

the parallels between his own thought and that of the originator of psycho-
analysis. That Marx had but little impact on this Fabian Socialist is in-
dicated by mere passing references in Wallas's classic.

Harold Lasswell
Harold Lasswell is universally acknowledged to be the modem leader
of political psychology, as evidenced in the invitation to be the first presi-
dent (honorary because of his age and health) of the International Society
of Political Psychology, founded in 1978. Beginning with Psychopathology
and Politics in 1930 and continuing practically to the present day, Lass-
well's contributions to political psychology are legion. One of the early
lay trainees in psychoanalysis, Lasswell established that route toward in-
volvement in political psychological studies for many political scientists
and historians who followed. Psychopathology and Politics was built on
the foundations of his psychoanalytic experience; in that book he made
extensive use of case studies of politically active men and women collected
from psychiatric practitioners. His behavioral writings have always been
enriched by a keen understanding of the political process, however, and
it is in this early book that the political roles of agitator, theorist, and
administrator were differentiated. Also in this same work is to be found
the formula for the conversion of personal needs into the public realm: that
private motives are displaced onto public objects and rationalized in terms
of the public interest (Lasswell, 1948, p. 38). Among the many works of
Lasswell which could be mentioned is Power and Personality (1948), in
which Lasswell joined the ranks of those who have speculated on the bases
of social power and delivered his famous dictum that power is a compensa-
tion for inferiority, a formulation that utilized the ideas of Alfred Adler,
among others: "Power," Lasswell hypothesized, "is expected to overcome
low estimates of the self, by changing either the traits of the self or the en-
vironment in which it functions" (1948, p. 39). This idea has been con-
tinuously modified (Lasswell, 1954, 1968), but the core notion remains.
Lasswell's ideas on the political personality, then, were drawn from his
own knowledge and observation of politics and from psychoanalytic for-
mulations of personality, both Freudian and neo-Freudian.

Junius Flagg Brown

The final figure to be mentioned in this section was neither a practicing
politician nor a political scientist. J. F. Brown was, rather, an academic
psychologist whose early career involved laboratory experimentation in
perception. Brown's major work, Psychology and the Social Order (1936),
12 WILLIAM F. STONE

is a milestone in political psychology, because it represents an attempt to

integrate several intellectual perspectives within an academic psychological
approach to understanding the political climate in which he lived. Writing
in the depth of the economic depression which affected the United States
so profoundly, Brown brought to bear the insights of Freud and Marx to-
gether with the field theoretical perspective of Kurt Lewin, with whom he
had studied in Berlin.
An early interpreter of Lewin to psychologists in the United States,
Brown (1929) felt that the context of human behavior can best be described
in terms of psychological and social fields. In turn, he found much of Marx's
writings on social class and his use of the dialectical method to be compatible
in most respects with field theory. And, although the person must be under-
stood in terms of field forces operating at the particular historical moment,
Brown believed that Freud's was the best approach then available to the
understanding of individual psychological dynamics. This integrative per-
spective was applied to the understanding of the psychological field of in-
dividuals living in the United States during the 1930s and also of persons
then living under fascist and communist dictatorships. An idea of the style
of Brown's approach might be gained through an example of his views on
leadership, the topic under which he is most frequently quoted by contem-
porary social psychologists.
A leader, thought Brown, must have membership character in the
group. As might be expected from his field orientation, Brown emphasized
situational determinants of leadership as opposed to "hero" theories. While
it may seem that changes in field structure are wrought by leaders, "the
activity of the leader is the resultant of changes in the field structure and
this activity only superficially changes the field" (Brown, 1936, p. 332).
Brown's work is important because he was the one psychologist of his time
who gave full treatment to the broad problems that today concern political
psychologists. That he is relatively neglected is owing partly to the social
field in which he was operating and partly to the lack of sustained follow-up
on his part. He left academic life in the early 1940s and, except for a minor
advisory role to the authors of The Authoritarian Personality, had no
further involvement in political psychology (Stone & Finison, 1980).
Certainly, many other writers contributed to the emergence of political
psychology as a distinct discipline. The names of Reich (1933) and Fromm
(1941), for example, might be listed. However, an extended list would simply
stimulate controversy over who should and who should not have appeared.
The present account rests with Harold Lasswell, about whom there will be
little dissent, Graham Wallas, whose work is generally credited but who we
need reminding of as memories dim, and J. F. Brown, a political psycholo-
gist whose work has been neglected.