This article by Jean E. Rhodes wrestles with discipline “rigor” and its historical foundations in Community Psychology.
See full article here: http://www.gjcpp.org/en/article.php?issue=22&article=133
What use is a theory if it cannot describe, explain, specify, and predict phenomena of interest? Applying this metric, Jason, Stevens, Ram, Miller, Beasley, and Gleason (2016) demonstrate the limits of three of the foundational theories of community psychology. The challenge for these and other theories stems from the field’s complexity and multiple levels of analysis. Consequently, many of the defining constructs (e.g., neighborhood, social ecology, empowerment) are insufficiently specified and tested. Yet, in light of the inherently interdisciplinary nature of community psychology, its attunement to evolving societal issues, and its broad, multi-level foci, one could argue that community psychology may never yield to the rigors and conventions of traditional psychological inquiry in ways that produce a distinct unifying theory.
Learn more about this network of Community Psychologists here: http://www.scra27.org/who-we-are/
Of note is that in June 2017, this group will be having their biannual conference in Ottawa
Location: Campus of the University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
Dates: June 21-24, 2017
Co-chairs: Tim Aubry & John Sylvestre (Centre for Research on Educational and Community Services, University of Ottawa); Manuel Riemer (Centre for Community Research, Learning, and Action, Wilfrid Laurier University)
Sponsored by: the University of Ottawa in partnership with Wilfrid Laurier University