Scielo RSS <![CDATA[Psychology in Society]]> http://www.scielo.org.za/rss.php?pid=1015-604620090002&lang=en vol. num. 37 lang. en <![CDATA[SciELO Logo]]> http://www.scielo.org.za/img/en/fbpelogp.gif http://www.scielo.org.za <![CDATA[<b>"<i>Gevaarlike</i> transitions"</b>: <b>negotiating hegemonic masculinity and rites of passage amongst coloured boys awaiting trial on the cape flats</b>]]> http://www.scielo.org.za/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1015-60462009000200001&lng=en&nrm=iso&tlng=en This study looks at the way 25 coloured, Afrikaans speaking boys, awaiting trial for various crimes, position themselves in relation to forms of hegemonic masculinity. Hegemonic masculinity refers to popular ideologies of ideal and actual characteristics of what it means to be a "real man". These ideologies are located in public spaces and institutions, such as the media, corporate world, military and government. Specifically, the paper explores how forms of hegemonic masculinity influence the boys in this study's rite of passage into manhood, which is observed in their stories of initiation into gangsterism. Through these tales the boys construct their masculinities in the form of both dominant, global understandings of what it means to be the "real man" and local language and descriptions of practices and rituals. They therefore create hybridised gendered identities, from their particular contexts. Whilst the boys endorse forms of hegemonic masculinity, such as a "Tupac Shakir outlaw" masculinity and a corporate executive masculinity, slivers of ambivalence appear in their discourse. This is due to the fact that these hegemonic masculinities are either largely unattainable or they temporarily empower the boys, but also leave them as children awaiting trial alone. <![CDATA[<b>Psychological expertise and governmentality in democratic South Africa</b>: <b>a tracer study of masters graduates from UKZN</b>]]> http://www.scielo.org.za/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1015-60462009000200002&lng=en&nrm=iso&tlng=en Foucault (1978) proposed that scientific discourses can become objects for political practice. Following from this, Nikolas Rose has elaborated how psychological expertise is implicated in the government of conduct in liberal democracies. In this study these ideas are explored in the local South African context, paying particular attention to post-apartheid imperatives to extend psychological services to socially relevant spheres. The sample was drawn from psychologists who graduated from UKZN (University of KwaZulu-Natal) between 1993 and 2003/4. Data were collected about problems that psychologists see in their daily working environments, their causes and the practices used to solve them. Findings indicate that psychologists deal with a range of traditional psychological problems as well as diverse social/structural problems. Individualised interventions, encouraging self-regulation, dominate both these groups of problems, including interventions focussing on the community and social change. We argue that psychological expertise as a tool for government finds its limits in conditions of extreme social and economic hardship. <![CDATA[<b>The five factor model of personality and individualism/collectivism in South Africa</b>: <b>an exploratory study</b>]]> http://www.scielo.org.za/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1015-60462009000200003&lng=en&nrm=iso&tlng=en The Five-Factor Model (FFM) of personality is one of the prominent models in contemporary psychology and defines personality in terms of five broad factors, namely, Neuroticism, Extraversion, Openness to Experience, Agreeableness, and Conscientiousness. Recent research, however, questions the comprehensiveness of the FFM with evidence indicating the presence of other factors not addressed in the FFM most notably Individualism/Collectivism. Therefore, this study investigated the relationship of the FFM of personality to Individualism/Collectivism in a sample of 176 students from the University of the Witwatersrand using the Basic Traits Inventory and the Individualism/Collectivism scale. Results indicate that there were no significant relationships between the five factors and Individualism/Collectivism. In addition no significant difference was found between race and the five factors and Individualism/Collectivism. There were also no significant differences between home language and the five factors and Individualism/Collectivism. <![CDATA[<b>Migrations of theory, method and practice</b>: <b>a reflection on themes in migration studies (Review article)</b>]]> http://www.scielo.org.za/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1015-60462009000200004&lng=en&nrm=iso&tlng=en In this review article, I offer some reflection on three themes in migration research, namely, the categorisation and quantification of migration, the role of trauma and distress in such categorisation, and the feminisation of migration. I was prompted to explore these three themes after reading a recent publication on migration in southern Africa (edited by Kok, Gelderblom, Oucho and Van Zyl, 2006). In this paper I raise these as three areas that appear to be determining the boundaries of the discipline of migration studies in ways that raise familiar concerns about representation, claims to objectivity and the perpetuation of inequalities. Although these are by no means new debates in the social sciences, they are ones that appear to have been excluded from migration studies in southern Africa with worrying implications for the role that the discipline can play in the repressive management of migration. <![CDATA[<b>Conference on HIV/AIDS vulnerable groups, human rights and development. November 15-16, 2007, Gaberone, Botswana </b>]]> http://www.scielo.org.za/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1015-60462009000200005&lng=en&nrm=iso&tlng=en In this review article, I offer some reflection on three themes in migration research, namely, the categorisation and quantification of migration, the role of trauma and distress in such categorisation, and the feminisation of migration. I was prompted to explore these three themes after reading a recent publication on migration in southern Africa (edited by Kok, Gelderblom, Oucho and Van Zyl, 2006). In this paper I raise these as three areas that appear to be determining the boundaries of the discipline of migration studies in ways that raise familiar concerns about representation, claims to objectivity and the perpetuation of inequalities. Although these are by no means new debates in the social sciences, they are ones that appear to have been excluded from migration studies in southern Africa with worrying implications for the role that the discipline can play in the repressive management of migration. <![CDATA[<b>Madness and method</b>: <b>approaches to the history of mental illness</b>]]> http://www.scielo.org.za/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1015-60462009000200006&lng=en&nrm=iso&tlng=en In this review article, I offer some reflection on three themes in migration research, namely, the categorisation and quantification of migration, the role of trauma and distress in such categorisation, and the feminisation of migration. I was prompted to explore these three themes after reading a recent publication on migration in southern Africa (edited by Kok, Gelderblom, Oucho and Van Zyl, 2006). In this paper I raise these as three areas that appear to be determining the boundaries of the discipline of migration studies in ways that raise familiar concerns about representation, claims to objectivity and the perpetuation of inequalities. Although these are by no means new debates in the social sciences, they are ones that appear to have been excluded from migration studies in southern Africa with worrying implications for the role that the discipline can play in the repressive management of migration. <![CDATA[<b>Between beauty and humiliation</b>: <b>casting a sharp eye on the panacea of psychology</b>]]> http://www.scielo.org.za/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1015-60462009000200007&lng=en&nrm=iso&tlng=en In this review article, I offer some reflection on three themes in migration research, namely, the categorisation and quantification of migration, the role of trauma and distress in such categorisation, and the feminisation of migration. I was prompted to explore these three themes after reading a recent publication on migration in southern Africa (edited by Kok, Gelderblom, Oucho and Van Zyl, 2006). In this paper I raise these as three areas that appear to be determining the boundaries of the discipline of migration studies in ways that raise familiar concerns about representation, claims to objectivity and the perpetuation of inequalities. Although these are by no means new debates in the social sciences, they are ones that appear to have been excluded from migration studies in southern Africa with worrying implications for the role that the discipline can play in the repressive management of migration. <![CDATA[<b>A critical gaze at psychology</b>]]> http://www.scielo.org.za/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1015-60462009000200008&lng=en&nrm=iso&tlng=en In this review article, I offer some reflection on three themes in migration research, namely, the categorisation and quantification of migration, the role of trauma and distress in such categorisation, and the feminisation of migration. I was prompted to explore these three themes after reading a recent publication on migration in southern Africa (edited by Kok, Gelderblom, Oucho and Van Zyl, 2006). In this paper I raise these as three areas that appear to be determining the boundaries of the discipline of migration studies in ways that raise familiar concerns about representation, claims to objectivity and the perpetuation of inequalities. Although these are by no means new debates in the social sciences, they are ones that appear to have been excluded from migration studies in southern Africa with worrying implications for the role that the discipline can play in the repressive management of migration. <![CDATA[<b>Watch this space</b>]]> http://www.scielo.org.za/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1015-60462009000200009&lng=en&nrm=iso&tlng=en In this review article, I offer some reflection on three themes in migration research, namely, the categorisation and quantification of migration, the role of trauma and distress in such categorisation, and the feminisation of migration. I was prompted to explore these three themes after reading a recent publication on migration in southern Africa (edited by Kok, Gelderblom, Oucho and Van Zyl, 2006). In this paper I raise these as three areas that appear to be determining the boundaries of the discipline of migration studies in ways that raise familiar concerns about representation, claims to objectivity and the perpetuation of inequalities. Although these are by no means new debates in the social sciences, they are ones that appear to have been excluded from migration studies in southern Africa with worrying implications for the role that the discipline can play in the repressive management of migration. <![CDATA[<b>HIV/AIDS</b>: <b>management and stigma</b>]]> http://www.scielo.org.za/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1015-60462009000200010&lng=en&nrm=iso&tlng=en In this review article, I offer some reflection on three themes in migration research, namely, the categorisation and quantification of migration, the role of trauma and distress in such categorisation, and the feminisation of migration. I was prompted to explore these three themes after reading a recent publication on migration in southern Africa (edited by Kok, Gelderblom, Oucho and Van Zyl, 2006). In this paper I raise these as three areas that appear to be determining the boundaries of the discipline of migration studies in ways that raise familiar concerns about representation, claims to objectivity and the perpetuation of inequalities. Although these are by no means new debates in the social sciences, they are ones that appear to have been excluded from migration studies in southern Africa with worrying implications for the role that the discipline can play in the repressive management of migration.