{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03195635229929852, 'fraction_numerical': 0.00857365549493375, 'mean_word_length': 5.551020408163265, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
‘Americanization’ of European Social Psychology

I am delighted to have an opportunity to respond to Sandra Schruijer’s thoughtful article ‘Whatever happened to the ‘‘European’’ in European social psychology?’ She raises important questions connecting ‘the ambitions and activities’ of the founders of the European Association of Experimental Social Psychology (EAESP) and the contemporary state of affairs of the Association, wondering whether – or to what extent – these ambitions have been fulfilled. Sandra Schruijer draws on Moscovici and Marková’s (2006) book The Making of Modern Social Psychology which discusses the history of European social psychology after the Second World War, the establishment of the EAESP in the context of the Cold War, dictatorship regimes in Latin America and other economic, social and political events at that time. Sandra Schruijer’s article concerns a specific historical event and, rightly, she collected ‘data’, chose the method of analysis and interpretation that would be chosen by a historian, but not by an experimental social psychologist. As Isaiah Berlin (1963: 78–9) argued, history is neither inductive nor deductive science. It studies events as unique, being interdependent with time and space in which they take place. Historians