555791
research-article2014
TAP0010.1177/0959354314555791Theory & PsychologyYang and Ye
Article
Theoretical psychology
in China: Past, present,
and future
Theory & Psychology
1 ­–17
© The Author(s) 2014
Reprints and permissions:
sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/0959354314555791
tap.sagepub.com
Wendeng Yang
Guangzhou University
Haosheng Ye
Guangzhou University
Abstract
This article first describes the three periods of the recent past in Chinese theoretical psychology:
(a) the period that introduced Western theoretical psychology and the establishment of Chinese
theoretical psychology (1917–1948), (b) the period that introduced Soviet Russian psychology
and the popularity of Marxist psychology (1949–1976), and (c) the period that reintroduced
Western theoretical psychology and the birth of its Chinese counterpart (1977–present). Then,
we discuss the trapped condition of contemporary Chinese theoretical psychology, such as the
need for originality, the change in the Chinese academic environment, and the lack of proper
self-positioning. To solve these problems in China, the following suggestions are proposed: (a)
advancement of meta-theoretical research, (b) support for experimental psychological studies,
(c) bridging of psychology and its neighboring disciplines, (d) bridging the gap between psychology
and the public, and (e) bridging domestic and foreign cultural psychology.
Keywords
China, Chinese theoretical psychology, future, past, present
A brief history of Chinese theoretical psychology
The introduction of Western theoretical psychology and the establishment
of Chinese theoretical psychology (1917–1948)
In ancient China, psychological thought was widely explored, but psychological science did
not yet exist. Institutional psychology can be dated to the late 19th and early 20th centuries.
Corresponding author:
Haosheng Ye, The Center for Mind and Brain, Guangzhou University, Guangzhou 510006, China.
Email: [email protected]
Downloaded from tap.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on May 18, 2016
2
Theory & Psychology 
In 1889, Yongjing Yan translated Joseph Haven’s Mental Philosophy: Including the Intellect,
Sensibilities, and Will (1857), the first Chinese translation of a psychology book. In 1908,
Yuanpei Cai came to Germany and attended three courses taught by Wundt. After he returned
to China in 1911, he was first nominated Minister of Education by the Provisional
Government of China and then became President of Peking University in 1916. He was
interested in psychology and supported Daqi Chen’s establishment of the first psychological
laboratory in China in 1917, which indicated that psychology had become an independent
discipline in China. In 1921, the Chinese Psychology Association was founded, and
Yaoxiang Zhang was chosen as its first chairman. In 1922, the first psychological journal,
Psychology, was published, with Zhang as the editor-in-chief. The journal’s aims were (a) to
review existing materials at home, (b) to report on new materials from abroad, and (c) to
develop Chinese psychological theories, which made this the first call for the Sinicization of
psychology. At the time, many scholars who had studied in the West, such as Daqi Chen,
Zing-yang Kuo, Heqin Chen, Shicheng Liao, Jiefu Gao, Shizhao Zhang, Jingxi Wang, and
Shu Pan, among others, taught and disseminated psychology in China and together they
started the first trend in Chinese theoretical psychology.
Daqi Chen (graduated from Tokyo Imperial University, 1912) published Outlines of
Psychology in 1918. The book was the first psychology textbook in China, and accepted the
viewpoints of structural psychology, criticized functionalism, and mainly introduced the latest research about sensation, perception, and emotion. Zing-yang Kuo (PhD from University
of California, Berkeley, 1923), who was a “radical scientific philosopher and innovative
experimentalist” (Gottlieb, 1972, p. 1), published “Giving up Instincts in Psychology” (Kuo,
1921). In the article, he insists that nativism represents a kind of finished psychology, which
attracted the attention of William McDougall. Kuo returned to China in 1923, where he established the psychology department in Fudan University and Zhejiang University, spreading
behaviorism in China. In 1921, Heqin Chen (graduated from Columbia University, 1919)
published “Children’s Minds and Methods of Educating Children”; and in 1925, he opened a
kindergarten in Nanjing as his research base and wrote the book Research on Children’s
Minds. Almost at the same time, Shicheng Liao (PhD, Brown University in 1919) published
Educational Psychology (1924), which was the first educational psychology textbook in
China. In the 1930s, Jiefu Gao (graduated from Hong Kong University, 1923) translated
Wolfgang Kohler’s Gestalt Psychology, and wrote many articles to introduce Gestalt psychology to China. Shizhao Zhang (graduated from University of Aberdeen, 1908) corresponded with Sigmund Freud in 1929. Zhang, together with Jiefu Gao, translated many of
Freud’s works, which led to a popularization of psychoanalytic theories in China.
Chinese psychology had entered the era of “letting a hundred flowers bloom and a hundred schools of thought contend” (Chinese proverb). Structuralism, functionalism, behaviorism, Gestalt psychology, psychoanalysis, and many other Western psychological schools
finally became known in China. Historically, several scholars (including Yuanpei Cai, Zingyang Kuo, and Jingxi Wang) pay little attention to psychological theory, and regard psychology as a sub-discipline of the natural sciences. However, on the whole, Chinese psychologists
pay growing interest in theory and Chinese theoretical psychology had emerged finally. In
the 1930s, theoretical psychology was offered in Tsinghua University as an optional course
(Che, 2010, p. 14). In 1942, Jingxi Wang (PhD, Johns Hopkins University, 1923) discussed
“the founding of theoretical psychology” in Education Research. In 1945, Shu Pan (PhD,
Downloaded from tap.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on May 18, 2016
3
Yang and Ye
University of Chicago, 1926) taught a theoretical psychology course in Chinese Central
University.
The introduction of Soviet Russian psychology and Marxist psychology
(1949–1976)
Having adopted several Western psychological theories, Chinese psychology began to be
integrated with Marxist philosophy especially following the revolution. In 1937, Yicen
Guo published A Summary of Modern Psychology, the first book to guide psychological
research with dialectical materialism in China. In 1939, Zeru Liu wrote the article
“Examples of Behavior Research,” which examines the dialectical rules of mental activities and criticizes behaviorism and Pavlov’s mechanical tendency. In 1944, Jingqing
Ruan’s book Psychology of Learning, which examines psychology from the perspective
of dialectical materialism, was listed as the main reference book by the education ministry of the People’s Republic of China (PRC). These publications laid the foundation for
the popularity of Marxist psychology in China.
In 1949, the PRC was founded, and politically it supported the Soviet Union. Due to
the political influence at that time, Chinese psychologists believed then that Western
psychology did not fit well with Chinese culture. To distinguish itself from Western psychology, Chinese psychology regarded Marxist philosophy as its basis and tried to learn
from Soviet psychology. Chinese theoretical psychology came to its first peak during this
period (Pan & Chen, 1959).
Theoretical psychology thrived in China mainly for the following reasons. First, psychology was a new science that adopted psychological theories from other countries and
required clarification of its meta-theories. In the late 1950s and early 1960s, many books
and papers about the nature, research mission, object, and methodology of psychology
were published. Although limited by the era, these studies advanced their respective
views and highlighted basic theoretical issues in China. Second, China was very poor,
was in severe financial crisis in its early years as a republic, and it could not afford to buy
much experimental equipment. The low cost and high output of theoretical psychology
made it the research preference of many Chinese scholars.
From 1949 to 1966, theoretical psychology, together with Chinese psychology, developed rapidly. In 1951, the Institute of Psychology of the Chinese Academy of Sciences
was founded. In 1952, Peking University recruited the first class of psychology majors
into its philosophy department, Nanjing University set up its psychology department,
and many teachers’ colleges founded institutes of psychology. In 1955, the Chinese
Psychological Society held the first assembly of psychologists and started a national
discussion on several basic issues related to psychological research objectives. In 1956,
the Ministry of Education instituted psychology as a basic science.
But then came the nationwide Cultural Revolution, which lasted for 10 years. In
October 1965, Wen-yuan Yao, a member of the Gang of Four,1 published the article “Is
This the Scientific Method and Correct Direction in Psychological Research?” in the
Kwang Ming Daily (Ge, 1965). Yao waged a campaign against psychology, taking psychology to be a pseudoscience or bourgeois psychology. In this way, psychology was
attacked politically and senior psychologists who disagreed with Yao were called
Downloaded from tap.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on May 18, 2016
4
Theory & Psychology 
bourgeois or reactionary and were subjected to persecution. Younger psychologists had
to turn to other tasks or work as farmhands or factory workers. Psychological teaching
and research ceased for almost 10 years (1966–1976).
The reintroduction of Western theoretical psychology and the birth of its
Chinese counterpart (1977– )
While Chinese psychology ceased its growth, Western theoretical psychology was developing rapidly. Multiple professional organizations and academic journals began to emerge.
In 1963, the Division of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology (24) of the American
Psychological Association was established. The Center for Advanced Study in Theoretical
Psychology was instituted by the University of Alberta, Canada, in 1965. In 1981, the
Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology was founded. The International
Society for Theoretical Psychology held its first conference in Plymouth, England, in
1985. In 1991, this journal, Theory & Psychology, was founded (Stam, 1991).
Fortunately, the Cultural Revolution finally ended, China began its reform policies,
and opened up to the rest of the world. In August 1977, the Chinese Psychological Society
resumed its activities and held a national assembly in Peking to discuss plans for development. However, there was now a large gap between Chinese and foreign research contributions. Experimental research had almost ceased. As a result of the hiatus, many
experimental psychologists began to perform theoretical studies. Both theoretical and
experimental psychologists focused on foreign psychology, especially Western psychology. These psychologists translated, introduced, and studied works on meta-theory, substantive theory, and the history of psychology, thus reviving theoretical psychology in
China. The Chinese Psychological Society founded its Basic Theories Research Institute
in 1979 and renamed it as its Psychological Theory Branch Committee the following year.
Since then, Chinese theoretical psychology has advanced considerably. In 1981, the
journal Psychological Exploration was founded, which publishes mainly theoretical psychology papers (it is still a main outlet for theoretical psychology in China). In the late
1990s, some theoretical psychologists turned their eyes on theoretical psychology itself,
starting to study the history, concept, nature, and function of Chinese theoretical psychology (e.g., L. J. Ge, 2005; Huo & Liang, 2004; G. C. Yan, 2000; Ye, 1998). Some scholars
also wrote books about Chinese theoretical psychology (e.g., Che, 2010; Huo, 2009;
Tang, 1994; Q. K. Wang, 1999; G. C. Yan, 2007). Generally speaking, Chinese psychologists agree with many of the viewpoints of foreign scholars. They take theoretical psychology as a sub-discipline, taking the study of theoretical psychology to cover
meta-theories and substantive theory; and the former are meant to sum up the nature of
all psychological branches while the latter deal with certain concrete and special psychological problems. The study of meta-theories, therefore, draws on abstract arguments and
that of substantive theories on logical reasoning and mathematical deduction.
Today, theoretical psychology courses are offered in some universities in China (e.g.,
Guangzhou University, Nanjing Normal University, etc.), and many postgraduates
majoring in theoretical psychology are enrolled. In 2009, the 13th Conference of the
International Society for Theoretical Psychology was held in Nanjing (Stenner, Cromby,
Motzkau, Yen, & Ye, 2011). After the conference, Chinese theoretical psychology
became more widely known to the world (X. Chen & Ren, 2009).
Downloaded from tap.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on May 18, 2016
5
Yang and Ye
The trapped condition of Chinese theoretical psychology
and the reasons behind it
In contrast to the positive viewpoints of some international scholars (Van Hezewijk,
2000), the development of theoretical psychology in China has not been so optimistic.
Some theoretical researchers have changed their focus to experimental research. Their
graduate students do not enjoy studying theoretical psychology. The number of theoretical psychology papers submitted to academic conferences has decreased yearly, as has
the number of attendees in these conferences.
Some scholars have expressed concern about the lack of originality in theoretical
psychology in China (L. S. Yan & Zeng, 2011). Some people misunderstand theoretical
psychology, considering it to be “armchair psychology,” which “talks about empty
things,” “and it cannot solve real problems” (some scholars have discussed these misunderstandings, e.g., Che & Guo, 1979; Pan, 1981). Theoretical psychology lacks effective
communication and cooperation with experimental psychology. Most theoretical psychology papers in the China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) are cited by
only a few others. Some scholars have even stated that theoretical psychologists “talk
[only] with themselves and appreciate themselves” (L. S. Yan & Zeng, 2011, p. 1216).
Chinese theoretical psychology has become stagnant for a number of reasons that we will
discuss in what follows.
Need for originality
Chinese theoretical psychology is “congenitally deficient” and has always been burdened by a “loss of originality” (e.g., Ou-yang, 2005; Zheng & Ye, 2007). There used to
be no psychology in China. Chinese psychologists mainly introduced and absorbed psychology from other countries. Before the founding of the new China,
university teachers just introduced and taught psychology without contributing their own ideas
… if they studied behavioral psychology, they just taught behaviorists’ views; if they studied
functional psychology, they taught functionalism, and will teach Gestalt psychology if the
scholar has learned it from a Gestalt psychologist. (Pan, 1980, p. 2)
After the liberation, Chinese theoretical psychologists worked hard to build a Chinese
psychological system. However, objectively, theoretical psychology developed more
slowly than experimental psychology: “After the passing away of some old theoretical
psychologists like Shu Pan, empirical research became the mainstream and theoretical
psychology no longer maintained its popularity” (Huo, 2011, p. 67).
The “loss of originality” was caused by several factors. First, Chinese theoretical
psychology focused on the introduction of foreign psychological theories. A long period
of introducing foreign theories led to the lack of originality, which in turn led to the reintroduction of foreign theories. This vicious cycle (introduction—lack of originality—
reintroduction) makes Chinese scholars less creative and some even completely ignore
the studies of their Chinese colleagues. If a Chinese scholar proposes his or her own
theory, some scholars will have a preconceived attitude to deny it. In this way, academic
innovation “really becomes underground activity” (L. J. Ge, 2005, p. 3). Second, Chinese
Downloaded from tap.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on May 18, 2016
6
Theory & Psychology 
scholars have a tradition of “only elaborating the theories of the predecessors but not
having their original ideas” (L. J. Ge, 2005, p. 3). They only study classical texts and the
academic frontiers. This lack of originality has worsened the position of theoretical psychology in psychology. Third, this may be connected with the traits of Chinese theoretical psychologists. Just as L. S. Yan & Zeng (2011) said, some Chinese psychologists do
not place their faith in a particular theory, and they usually change their focus quickly.
Some prefer working alone rather than working together. And until now, there have been
no innovative and widely accepted concepts or theories in the world constructed by
Chinese theoretical psychologists.
Change of Chinese academic environment: Three issues
First, just like the rising of theoretical psychology in China, the trapped condition of
Chinese theoretical psychology is also closely connected to the development of China.
As the country invested more money to develop its scientific research, many universities
built well-equipped laboratories, facilitated with fMRI machines, etc. With the improvement of experimental conditions, some theoretical psychologists have begun to do experimental research, especially younger psychology scholars, most of whom choose to work
in experimental psychology.
Second, there has been a great change in the academic evaluation and assessment
system in China which has strongly influenced psychology. A Chinese scholar must publish papers in Science Citation Index listed journals with high impact factors if he or she
wishes to be considered for promotion or to be materially rewarded. People usually evaluate a scholar’s academic achievement by the quantity of his or her SCI-journal listed
papers. But it is also problematic for Chinese scholars to write in English. Comparatively
speaking, there is a relatively stable format for writing an experimental psychology
paper, so it’s easier to write an English experimental psychology article. Many scholars
turn to work on experimental psychology, where perhaps it proves to be easier for them
to publish SCI-journal listed papers.
The third issue concerns research funding. In China, most of the research funds come
from the government. The government-supported funds mainly include natural science
funds and social science funds. But the social science funds only amount to about one
quarter of the amount of natural science funds. Usually, theoretical psychologists can
apply for social science funds and experimental psychologists for natural science funds.
In addition, as some Chinese officials attach great importance to science and practice,
theoretical psychology is considered not “practical” or “scientific” enough. Thus, obtaining research funds is difficult for theoretical psychologists.
Lack of proper self-positioning
Indeed, the lack of originality and the change in the Chinese academic environment are
two main reasons that have caused the trapped condition of Chinese theoretical psychology. However, neither is the most important reason. The most important reason is the
lack of proper self-positioning. Theoretical psychology has focused on meta-theory studies, exaggerated its guidance, and criticized the functions of other psychological fields,
Downloaded from tap.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on May 18, 2016
7
Yang and Ye
Figure 1. The structure of theoretical psychology (W. D. Yang & Ye, 2012, p. 154).
all of which have contributed to its difficult situation. Theoretical psychology does not
study the fields it should study and does not shoulder the mission it should shoulder.
Therefore, the “space” of theoretical psychology has been greatly narrowed. There are
two further issues here:
First, the practice field of Chinese theoretical psychology needs to be expanded.
Theoretical psychology includes such fields as meta-theory, empirical theory, sub-disciplinary, and psychological theory studies (Figure 1, W. D. Yang & Ye, 2012). However,
for a long time, Chinese theoretical psychology has limited its own research in the “basic
theories of psychology” and focused too much on its specialty. Many of the latest international studies about meta-theory have been translated into Chinese, but substantive
theory and interaction with other disciplines have been neglected. These works emphasized the core features of theoretical psychology and benefited its initial development.
However, after a long period of time, the work obstructed the development of theoretical
psychology. Meta-theory research, substantive theory research, and even theoretical
research about psychology are important practical fields of Chinese theoretical psychology. When Chinese theoretical psychology neglects these fields, it “actively” limits its
practical fields and restricts its development.
Second, Chinese theoretical psychology does not clearly know its functions. In the past,
Chinese theoretical psychology always stressed its guiding and criticizing functions for
Downloaded from tap.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on May 18, 2016
8
Theory & Psychology 
other branches of psychology. It does have all these functions, but these functions do not
completely define Chinese theoretical psychology. The functions of theoretical psychology
in psychology are similar to those of theoretical physics in physics or even to the role of
philosophy in modern science. Using theoretical psychology methods, we can judge existing theories and build new ones. However, theoretical psychology often does not directly
participate in experimental research and social practice. Even without theoretical psychology, the other branches of psychology can conduct research well if they focus on small
substantive theories related to their research. In fact, when theoretical psychology almost
died out, psychology still made advances. Therefore, Chinese theoretical psychology
should “bend down,” expand its functions, and be willing to be a “cooperator” or “collaborationist” of other branches of psychology. Aside from meta-theory research, the functions
of Chinese theoretical psychology should be embodied in the process of “bridging” or
“communicating,” through which its existing values will be realized.
The future of Chinese theoretical psychology: Expand its
field of practice
Advancing meta-theory research
The study of meta-theory is the core of Chinese theoretical psychology; in fact, it used to
be its major domain. Che (1997) divides basic theoretical research into these nine aspects:
research object, methodology, essence of mind, relationship with Pavlovian theory, motivations, relationship between mind and practice, division of basic scopes for mental
activities, consciousness and unconsciousness, and personality. Studies on the philosophical basis of psychology and its methodology have become mainstream meta-theory
research. Many theoretical psychology researchers have considerably studied positivism,
phenomenology, hermeneutics, and postmodernist philosophy, such as Kuhn’s theory of
paradigms, social constructionism, and feminism. The division and integration of psychology and new ideas in Western psychology have also been examined.
Based on meta-theory research, we propose that research should be focused on two
aspects. First, we should use the history of psychology to promote meta-theory research.
The history of psychology has complex relations with theoretical psychology such that
Chinese scholars usually combine them (e.g., the Theoretical Psychology and History of
Psychology Division of the Chinese Psychological Society). The history of psychology
always uses a theory as its guide, which determines the choice and organization of its
materials. Excluding strict annals, the history of psychology is the history of theory,
logic, or thought. We cannot study theoretical psychology without mentioning the history of psychology. Theoretical psychology always cites materials from its history to
prove its viewpoints. The two fields significantly overlap and are thus difficult to separate. Many theoretical psychologists are famous scholars of meta-theory. Therefore, the
relationships between history and theory should be addressed to promote both fields,
which are important practice fields of theoretical psychology.
Second, we should be concerned about the ethical and political factors affecting psychology. Studies on the future of psychology and its effect on public interest are important topics of meta-theory. According to Martin,
Downloaded from tap.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on May 18, 2016
9
Yang and Ye
As moral and political philosophers, theoretical psychologists have an obligation not only to
theorize about the general relationship between human life and the practices of psychology, but
more specifically to interpret and critique specific applications of psychological science that seem
not to acknowledge important moral and political aspects of psychological practice. (2004, p. 7)
Generally, meta-theory studies are the basis of theoretical psychology. Only when this
foundation is consolidated can we explore other practical fields. Otherwise, a large tree
dies, although its leaves flourish, because the root is not unburdened.
Supporting experimental psychology studies
As mentioned above, some misunderstanding exists between experimental psychology
and theoretical psychology in China. Chinese theoretical psychology has argued with
experimental psychology for over 10 years, severely criticizing it on the following
grounds: (a) the stricter the experimental conditions are, the further from reality experimental psychology departs; (b) experimental psychology makes method-centered mistakes; and (c) cognitive neuropsychology also has made “reductionist” errors. We may
be able to determine the activity of each cell, but we still do not know what our brains are
thinking. Furthermore, (d) mainstream experimental psychology is centered on Western
culture, and its research participants are often college sophomores. Therefore, experimental psychology knowledge is not universal; (e) psychological knowledge is not only
derived from experience but is also constructed by society; finally, (f) experimental psychology does not consider moral principles and political implications.
Objectively, these criticisms are not always unreasonable. Experimental psychology
has considered these criticisms and improved to some degree. For example, Chen Li, one
of the most well-known experimental psychologists in China, wrote a paper, “Plain Talk
on Whither Psychology” when he was 96 years old, in which he reflected his many years
of experimental psychology study, and he believed that psychology should pay more
attention to theoretical psychology. He pointed out that “to overcome crises in psychological research, it is proposed to break the shackles of rigid methodology, … I incline to
extend methodology to Hermeneutics to the study of values” (L. Chen, 1997, p. 385).
However, experimental psychologists complain that experimental psychology and
theoretical psychology discuss on different platforms and argue the following: (a) theoretical psychology cannot find a better research method than experimental psychology
methods, (b) the development of more experimental methods and new equipment has
facilitated the study of more projects, (c) experimental psychology welcomes criticisms
about its research process but is unwilling to accept those about its research conclusions,
(d) experimental psychology welcomes constructive suggestions but cannot tolerate any
denial of its existence, and (e) experimental psychology does not despise theory but
instead builds and tests theory through experiments. Experimental psychology has its
own methodology. It has had enough of the theoretical psychologists’ endless suggestions, which it could not apply. Little common ground for understanding existed between
people with differing principles. After a period of fierce discussions, experimental psychologists found the argument unhelpful; thus, they concentrated on their experiments,
leaving theoretical psychologists to their own discussions.
Downloaded from tap.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on May 18, 2016
10
Theory & Psychology 
Criticism is an important function of theoretical psychology, but we should not overemphasize this function. According to Ye (2003), the most important function of theoretical psychology is “to form hypotheses and to make predictions for the research focus of
experiential psychology” (p. 550). Theoretical psychology and experimental psychology
collaborate with each other and both advance psychology. Experimental psychologists
can consult theoretical psychologists about knowledge on history, philosophical assumptions that underlie their ideas, and literature that extends and elaborates these ideas.
In China, experimental psychology needs to cooperate with theoretical psychology.
For example, when writing a research paper, researchers usually have difficulty with the
introduction and discussion sections. A doctoral candidate majoring in experimental psychology may have difficulty discussing theoretical implications in his/her academic dissertation. Theoretical psychologists also cannot perform only “thought experiments”;
experimental psychologists are their honest and reliable friends. Experimental results are
the foundation for building a theory, and the validity of a theory is tested by experiments.
A natural balance exists between theoretical and experimental psychology. In China,
only a few experimental psychologists despise theory; they are mainly uninterested in
obscure and mysterious theory. Similarly, only a few theoretical psychologists look down
on experiments and severely criticize them because of their research beliefs. Theory and
experiment are the two crutches of psychology, two wings of one body. These two fields
should bury the hatchet and join forces so each could perform its own functions and
solve real-world problems.
Bridging psychology and its neighboring disciplines
Psychology may only be a small discipline, but it is a special one. Pan (1986) suggests
that psychology is a science parallel to natural science, social science, and the humanities. Some Chinese psychologists still have “physics envy” and consider psychology to
be relatively “soft.” However, compared with education and management science, perhaps psychology is much “harder.” These neighboring disciplines require psychological
theories. For example, in China, education always takes psychology as its basis, and
philosophy usually cites psychological research when it discusses important subjects
such as mind–body or thinking–existence problems.
However, some difficulties remain in the interaction between psychology and its
neighboring disciplines. Some researchers in neighboring disciplines usually feel that it
is difficult to understand psychological papers, and experimental psychologists may not
be very interested in disseminating their own research conclusions to other disciplines.
Theoretical psychologists can bridge the gap between them. They can not only translate
and disseminate research findings to neighboring disciplines but also introduce the topics
of neighboring disciplines to experimental psychologists.
For example, body phenomenology is a philosophical theory about the relationship
between mind and body. Theoretical psychology introduces this theory to psychology,
stimulating a wave of embodied cognition research. Embodied cognition has now
become a popular topic in experimental psychology (Ye, 2011). At the same time, psychological theory can spread to its neighboring disciplines. For example, hierarchy of
needs theory is also an important management theory and psychoanalysis and stream of
Downloaded from tap.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on May 18, 2016
11
Yang and Ye
consciousness have significantly influenced literature more broadly. Daniel Kahneman
was awarded the Nobel Prize in Economics in 2002 for integrating insights from psychological research into economic science.
In China, many scholars hope to learn psychological theories to advance their own
research. Some education science scholars hold the view that psychology’s research
achievements will become an important theoretical basis for education reform. The integration of education with psychology can change the lack of a scientific empirical basis
and lay a solid scientific foundation for it (D. Y. Wang & Wei, 2013). Some philosophy
scholars demonstrate that, from the beginning of analytic philosophy, to the decade of
logic empiricism, and the rise of philosophy of mind, psychology always imposes influences (Y. Liu, 2009). Besides, many scholars who study moral philosophy, social work,
management science, linguistics, etc., are using psychological research methods or conclusions; in this way, these disciplines can develop faster and better.
Bridging the gap between psychology and the public
Theoretical psychologists do not have a position in social practice. Bridging the gap
between psychology and the public is another important practical field of Chinese theoretical psychology.
On the one hand, theoretical psychology can directly participate in social practice. In
2006, Theory & Psychology issued a special section called “Theory in Action,” which
focused on the topic of how theoretical psychology could act (Gergen & Zielke, 2006).
Indeed, “Nothing is more practical than a good theory” (Lewin, 1951, p.169). On the
other hand, theoretical psychology can be a “translator” or “go-between” between psychology and the public. Theory is part of effective behavior and has practical functions
itself (Ye, 2007). When ordinary people deal with an issue, they unconsciously use a
certain theory, which affects their manner or attitude in daily life. For example, the public’s acceptance of a physical health concept or a physical/mental/social pattern of health
concept directly affects the way they access and maintain health. Common-sense psychological theories are usually used in daily life, as evidenced by the public’s strong
demand for psychological knowledge.
However, in the dissemination of psychological theories in China, scientific psychology has not occupied the public’s consciousness. Moreover, common-sense psychology
and pseudo-psychology have occupied this territory. For example, many so-called “success science,” astrology, and interpersonal skill books under the banner of “psychology”
are prominently placed in bookshops. In newspapers, magazines, and television, many
essayists and artists are doing what should be done by psychologists. Experimental psychologists are more interested in producing knowledge and lack interest in popularizing
and applying knowledge. Perhaps this motivation is excusable. This is not to say that
experimental psychologists have no such responsibility or ability to do this. However, it
is surprising that theoretical psychologists have long been absent from this field.
Theoretical psychologists have particular advantages. First, they are effective in theoretical thinking and are familiar with psychological history, theory, and the development of
experimental psychology. Second, given their professional training, they are sensitive to
the zeitgeist and the needs of society. Finally, compared with experimental psychologists,
Downloaded from tap.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on May 18, 2016
12
Theory & Psychology 
theoretical psychologists conduct less experimental research and have more time and
advantages to popularize psychology.
Theoretical psychology requires broad education in areas both inside and outside the
domain of psychology. The relations between psychology and other scholarly disciplines
are part of the intellectual purview of this sub-discipline. Consequently, courses in the
philosophy of social science, namely the intellectual history of psychology, epistemology, ontology, metaphysics, and ethics, are crucial in training theoretical psychologists.
Theoretical psychologists may also acquire expertise in a traditional sub-discipline of
psychology (e.g., clinical, cognitive, and social psychology), enabling them to focus
their theoretical efforts on a more specific domain of interest.
Therefore, theoretical psychologists are an important force in the popularization of
psychology. They have the responsibility to disseminate psychology to the public by
using more entertaining forms and straightforward language. They also have the obligation to monitor public concerns and academic topics for experimental psychologists.
Bridging domestic and foreign cultural psychology
From the perspective of cross-cultural and multi-cultural psychology, Western psychology is only a single-culture psychology similar to Eastern, Soviet Russian, and Arabian
psychology and is only one member of global psychology. Western psychology has
begun to reflect on its cultural limitations. Some postmodern psychologists point out that
Western psychology is European- and American-centered, using mainly Western middleclass white sophomores as research participants. Other Western psychologists, such as
Jung and Maslow, paid attention to Eastern culture. They absorbed some wisdom from
this culture and founded some of their theoretical frameworks on its characteristics.
Some international psychologists are keen to learn about Chinese culture. However,
only a few foreign psychologists can understand the Chinese language; most of them
have to read translated works. Unfortunately, seldom can they read English articles and
books written by Chinese psychologists; thus, they have to read publications from some
other discipline (e.g., philosophy). Some Chinese scholars, especially Hong Kong and
Taiwanese scholars, have made efforts to bridge the gap between domestic and foreign
cultural psychology under the banner of indigenous and cross-cultural psychology (e.g.,
Pan, 1980; G. S. Yang, 2004; Z. F. Yang, 2009). However, compared with the everincreasing demands of foreign psychology, these efforts remain inadequate.
Chinese experimental psychologists keep up with the global frontier. Most of them
study cognitive psychology, which is not closely related to culture. The mission of bridging domestic and foreign cultural psychology goes to Chinese theoretical psychologists.
In fact, they do have some advantages in this respect. On the one hand, Chinese theoretical psychologists have rich experiences in introducing international psychology schools
and theories and are very familiar with international theoretical psychology. On the other
hand, some of them have a deep understanding of Chinese culture and can disseminate
Chinese ancient psychological thought abroad in forms that international psychologists
can understand.
As far as we are concerned, the communication between domestic and foreign cultural psychology has been a key mission in Chinese theoretical psychology. However,
Downloaded from tap.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on May 18, 2016
13
Yang and Ye
this communication is doomed to be a long-term and gradual process consisting of four
steps.
The first step is the introduction of foreign psychological theories to China, including
psychological methodology, statistical skills, and equipment. This step started from the
founding of the People’s Republic of China. It is almost finished now, and Chinese theoretical psychologists have performed it very well. Many well-known books have been
translated into Chinese, and some even have several Chinese versions. Modern schools
of thought, such as positivist, evolutionary, and postmodern psychology, have also been
introduced to China.
The second step is the introduction of Chinese psychology to international psychology. This step has already begun. In the 1980s, for instance, many psychologists (e.g.,
Qicheng Jing and Houcan Zhang) published English articles in international psychological journals (e.g., Chinese Psychological Society, 1983; Ching, 1980; Hsu, Ching, &
Over, 1980; Jing & Fu, 1995; Z-M. Wang, 1993; H. C. Zhang, 1988; K. Zhang, 2007; F.
Zhou & Wang, 2007; X. Zhou & Luo, 2003). In the field of theoretical psychology,
Guoan Yue introduced the achievements of Chinese theoretical psychology to international psychology in Theory & Psychology (Yue, 1994a, 1994b). These articles objectively discuss the history and conditions of Chinese theoretical psychology and have
enabled international psychologists to learn about Chinese psychology.
However, these articles have a limited number and a relatively narrow range of content. Chinese theoretical psychology can organize some scholars to study the Chinese
history of psychology and Chinese cultural psychology to translate some psychology
classics and newly printed books for foreign readers. Chinese scholars can also publish
papers in international academic journals to discuss popular topics both at home and
abroad from the perspective of Chinese culture.
The third step is the building of a Chinese-featured psychology. As early as the 1980s,
Pan (1980) proposed that “we should make our contributions to the basic viewpoints,
basic theoretical problems and methodologies in international psychology. Then, our
psychology can have its own features” (p. 8). Chinese psychology can surely be developed as a unique, Chinese-featured, and original psychology, similar to Soviet Russian
psychology. For example, Pan used the ancient Chinese philosophical saying “xi yu xing
cheng” (i.e., “a person’s habits form his or her personality”) to view how human nature
is created. This saying is now a famous example of using Chinese culture to solve contemporary psychological problems. Pan “not only [gathered] historical materials, but
[also used] them to solve contemporary psychology problems and promote the development of psychology” (S. P. Guo & Chen, 2011, p. 94). Some Chinese theoretical psychologists are working hard in this area (e.g., L. J. Ge, 2008; F. Y. Wang & Zheng, 2009).
Even some farsighted international psychologists are expecting this development. As
advice to Chinese theoretical psychology students, theoretical psychologist Thomas Teo
said that instead of introducing Western concepts, Chinese psychologists should create
their own concepts. In this way, Eastern and Western perspectives can be integrated, and
a real global theoretical psychology can emerge (B. Wang, 2011).
The fourth step is the development of and collaboration between Chinese and international psychology. In this process, Chinese and international psychologists communicate
with each other regarding common concepts, theories, and problems, which can be
Downloaded from tap.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on May 18, 2016
14
Theory & Psychology 
proposed by either party based on Chinese culture. For example, after studying Chinese
culture and behaviorist psychology, Zing-yang Kuo proposed his own psychological
theory, which psychologist N. W. Smith referred to as “probabilistic epigenetic psychology,” and is considered one of over 10 kinds of theoretical systems used by textbook
editors (2007). After a relatively long time, Chinese and international psychology can
finally work together on the same platform and lead the development of psychology.
Funding
This project has been supported by the Research Foundation of Education Bureau of Guangdong
Province, China(Grant No. 2011TJK166; 2012WYM_0101).
Note
1. The Gang of Four were the most powerful members of a radical political elite convicted
for implementing the harsh policies directed by Chinese Communist Party (CCP) chairman
Mao Zedong during the Cultural Revolution (1966–1976). The members consisted of Mao
Zedong’s last wife Jiang Qing, the leading figure of the group, and her close associates Zhang
Chunqiao, Yao Wenyuan, and Wang Hongwen. The power exercised by the Gang of Four had
such a devastating effect on China that economic, cultural, and educational institutions were
in a state of chaos. China was on the brink of destruction.
References
All sources are in Chinese except as indicated by an asterisk.
Che, W. B. (1997). Research of psychological basic theory. In S. Wang, Z. X. Lin, & Q. C. Jing
(Eds.), Psychological science in China (pp. 223–277). Jilin, China: Jilin Educational Press.
Che, W. B. (2010). Theoretical psychology in China. Beijing, China: Capital Normal University
Press.
Che, W. B., & Guo, Z. J. (1979). 30 years of Chinese theoretical psychology. Acta Psychologica
Sinica, 12(3), 267–280.
Chen, D. Q. (1918). Outlines of psychology. Beijing, China: Commercial Press.
Chen, H. Q. (1921). Children’s mind and methods of educating children. New Education, 3(2),
135–145.
Chen, H. Q. (1925). Research on children’s mind. Beijing, China: Commercial Press.
Chen, L. (1997). Plain talk on whither psychology. Psychological Science, 20(5), 385–389.
Chen, X., & Ren, Y. H. (2009). Challenge and reform of theoretical psychology. Psychological
Science, 32(4), 1023.
*Chinese Psychological Society. (1983). Sixty years of Chinese psychology: Retrospect and prospect: In commemoration of the 60th anniversary of the founding of the Chinese Psychological
Society. International Journal of Psychology, 18(1–2), 167–187.
*Ching, C. C. (1980). Psychology in the People’s Republic of China. American Psychologist, 35,
1084−1089.
Ge, L. J. (2005). The basic functions of research in theoretical psychology. Journal of Shanxi
Normal University (Social Science Edition), 32(4), 1–5.
Ge, L. J. (2008). The manifesto of the neo-psychology of mind-nature: Neo-century choice of psychology development in China. Beijing, China: People Publishing House.
Ge, M. R. (1965, October 28). Is this the scientific method and correct direction in psychological
research? Kwang Ming Daily, A2.
Downloaded from tap.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on May 18, 2016
15
Yang and Ye
*Gergen, K., & Zielke, B. (Eds.). (2006). Theory in action [Special section]. Theory & Psychology,
16, 299–415.
*Gottlieb, G. (1972). Zing-Yang Kuo: Radical scientific philosopher and innovative experimentalist (1898–1970). Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology, 80(1), 1–10.
Guo, S. P., & Chen, S. G. (2011). Methodological issues in the integration of Chinese psychology
and western psychology: Difficulties and innovations in the studies on the history of Chinese
psychology. Journal of Nanjing Normal University (Social Science Edition), 57(4), 94–100.
Guo, Y. C. (1937). A summary of modern psychology. Beijing, China: Commercial Press.
*Haven, J. (1857). Mental philosophy: Including the intellect, sensibilities, and will. New York,
NY: Gould and Lincoln.
*Hsu, L. T., Ching, C. C., & Over, R. (1980). Recent developments in psychology within the
People’s Republic of China. International Journal of Psychology, 15, 131–144.
Huo, Y. Q. (2009). Rediscovering the value of psychological theories. Beijing, China: China
Social Sciences Press.
Huo, Y. Q. (2011). Modern research of psychological basic theory. Xi’an, China: Shaanxi Normal
University Press.
Huo, Y. Q., & Liang, S. C. (2004). New characteristics of western theoretical psychology.
Advances in Psychological Science, 12(1), 152–158.
*Jing, Q. C., & Fu, X. L. (1995). Factors influencing the development of psychology in China.
International Journal of Psychology, 30, 717–728.
*Kuo, Z. Y. (1921). Giving up instincts in psychology. Journal of Philosophy, 18(24), 645–664.
*Lewin, K. (1951). Field theory in social science: Selected theoretical papers (D. Cartwright,
Ed.). New York, NY: Harper & Row.
Liao, S. C. (1924). Educational psychology. Shanghai, China: Chinese Publishing House.
Liu, Y. (2009). On the influences of psychology on the development of analytic philosophy.
Wuhan University Journal (Humanity Sciences), 62(3), 315–318.
Liu, Z. R. (1939). Examples of behavior research. Theory & Reality, 1(2), 66–80.
*Martin, J. (2004). What can theoretical psychology do? Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical
Psychology, 24(1), 1–13.
Ou-yang, C. Q. (2005). Originality: Rational pursuit of research in psychology. Psychological
Exploration, 25(4), 3–6.
Pan, S. (1980). On the investigation of the basic theoretical problems of psychology. Acta
Psychologica Sinica, 13(3), 1–8.
Pan, S. (1981). The opening speech in division of theoretical psychology of Chinese Psychological
Society. Psychological Exploration, 1(1), 2–5.
Pan, S. (1986). On discipline system of psychology. Social Sciences in China, 7(4), 135–142.
Pan, S., & Chen, D. R. (1959). Ten years’ developments in Chinese psychology. Acta Psychologica
Sinica, 4(4), 191–203.
Ruan, J. Q. (1944). Psychology of learning. Shanghai, China: Cultural Supplication Press.
Smith, N. W. (2007). Current systems in psychology: History, theory, research, and applications
(B. Y. Guo, Q. Y. Xiu, S. H. Fang, & X. W. Wu, Trans.). Xi’an, China: Shaanxi Normal
University Press.
*Stam, H. J. (1991). Theory & Psychology: The re-emergence of theory in psychology. Theory &
Psychology, 1, 5–11. doi:10.1177/0959354391011001
*Stenner, P, Cromby, J., Motzkau, J., Yen, J., & Ye, H. (2011). Theoretical psychology: Global
transformations and challenges. Toronto, Canada: Captus.
Tang, Z. J. (1994). New exploration to theoretical psychology issues: Researches on Pan Shu’s
psychological thoughts. Chong Qing, China: Chong Qing Press.
Downloaded from tap.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on May 18, 2016
16
Theory & Psychology 
*Van Hezewijk, R. (2000). The century of theoretical psychology? Theory & Psychology, 10,
99–106. doi:10.1177/0959354300010001604
Wang, B. (2011). Critical stance of theoretical psychology: Dialogue with Professor Thomas Teo.
Social Sciences Abroad, 34(5), 125–132.
Wang, D. Y., & Wei, W. (2013). New trends of education science development: Influences from
cognitive neuroscience. Journal of Bio-Education, 1(3), 226–231.
Wang, F. Y., & Zheng, H. (2009). Knowledge makes wisdom: A classic Chinese notion of wisdom. Journal of Nanjing Normal University (Social Science Edition), 55(4), 104–110.
Wang, J. X. (1942). Establishment of theoretical psychology. Educational Research, 15, 5–6.
Wang, Q. K. (1999). Finding the nature out of mind: The research and development of theoretical
psychology. Wuhan, China: Central China Normal University Press.
*Wang, Z-M. (1993). New Chinese approach in psychological research. Psychology and
Developing Societies, 5(2), 151–169. doi:10.1177/097133369300500204
Yan, G. C. (2000). Several issues on theoretical psychology. Psychological Exploration, 20(1),
3–7.
Yan, G. C. (2007). Theoretical psychology. Guangzhou, China: Jinan University Press.
Yan, L. S., & Zeng, L. P. (2011). An introspection on the originality of Chinese theoretical psychology. Psychological Science, 34(5), 1216–1221.
Yang, G. S. (2004). Mental and behavioral features of Chinese people. Beijing, China: China
Renmin University Press.
Yang, W. D., & Ye, H. S. (2012). Chinese theoretical psychology: Concept, trouble and its practical fields. Journal of Huazhong Normal University (Humanities and Social Sciences), 51(4),
152–160.
Yang, Z. F. (2009). How to understand Chinese people. Chongqin, China: Chongqin University
Press.
Ye, H. S. (1998). Decline of positivism and renaissance of theoretical psychology. Journal of
Nanjing Normal University (Social Science Edition), 44(1), 65–69.
Ye, H. S. (2003). On the concept, character and function of theoretical psychology. Psychological
Science, 26(6), 549–550.
Ye, H. S. (2007). Theoretical psychology in a post-empiricist era. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 39(1),
184–190.
Ye, H. S. (2011). Embodied cognition: A consideration from theoretical psychology. Acta
Psychologica Sinica, 43(5), 589–598.
*Yue, G. A. (1994a). Theoretical psychology in China today. Theory & Psychology, 4, 261–275.
doi:10.1177/0959354394042006
*Yue, G. A. (1994b). More on Chinese theoretical psychology: A rejoinder to Matthias Petzold.
Theory & Psychology, 4, 281–283. doi:10.1177/0959354394042008
*Zhang, H. C. (1988). Psychological measurement in China. International Journal of Psychology,
23(1), 101–117.
*Zhang, K. (2007). Psychology in China and the Chinese Psychological Society. Japanese
Psychological Research, 49(2), 172–177.
Zheng, R. S., & Ye, H. S. (2007). The lack of new psychological ideas in China and the strategies
for improvement. Psychological Science, 30(2), 465–467.
*Zhou, F., & Wang, D. (2007). Dissociation between implicit and explicit attitudes towards the
rich in a developing country: The case of China. Social Behavior and Personality, 35(3),
295–302.
*Zhou, X., & Luo, Y. (2003). Cognitive neuroscience in China. International Journal of
Psychology, 38, 299–310.
Downloaded from tap.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on May 18, 2016
17
Yang and Ye
Author biographies
Wendeng Yang is an Associate Professor in the Center for Mind and Brain at Guangzhou
University. His research is mainly concerned with theoretical psychology and the history of psychology. He has published papers on a variety of topics relating to, among other things, theoretical
psychology, Marxist psychology, and activity theory. Email: [email protected]
Haosheng Ye is a Professor of Theoretical Psychology in the Center for Mind and Brain at
Guangzhou University. His work over the past 30 years has been focused on the history of psychology and Chinese psychology. He has published 20 books and more than 200 papers, and he is
associate editor of the journal Psychological Exploration. Email: [email protected]
Downloaded from tap.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on May 18, 2016