Finding Her Roots:

For Judy Harackiewicz on Her Retirement

John F. Kihlstrom

University of California, Berkeley

Paper presented in abbreviated form at a Festschrift for Judith M. Harackiewicz, Madison, Wisconsin May 17-18, 2024.

I regret that I can’t be with you in person to honor Judy’s career, but I thank Cameron Hecht for the invitation to join the celebration at a distance, and I send greetings to my former colleagues in Madison.

I first met Judy in 1975, when I was a brand-new assistant professor at Harvard and she was an incoming graduate student in the Personality and Developmental Studies Program, seeking an advisor. Given where she came from (about which more later), one possibility was Matina Horner, who had recently made a splash with her study of fear of success and other anomalies of achievement motivation (Horner, 1969, 1970). Unfortunately, Horner had left the Department to become president of Radcliffe College. Another obvious choice, David McClelland, had literally written the book on achievement motivation (McClelland, Atkinson, Clark, & Lowell, 1953); but at the time he was collecting saliva and urine samples for a physiological study of the power motive (McClelland, Davidson, Saron, & Floor, 1980; McClelland, Floor, Davidson, & Saron, 1980).

The lore at Harvard was that, if you were going to have a junior faculty member as an advisor, you should choose someone who had joined the Department recently: given Harvard’s reluctance to tenure junior faculty, at least you would have some assurance that they would still be around to see you through to your degree. That was me. So, there she stood in my doorway introducing herself and asking me what I did. I told her that I did hypnosis research, and that I was particularly interested in posthypnotic amnesia. I swear that she scrunched up her nose and stuck out her tongue (you all know that look!). Nevertheless, I became her advisor, and stayed long enough to chair her dissertation committee and her oral examination -- which, if I remember correctly, took place in Grendel’spub Den, a in Harvard Square (though it might have been Casablanca or The Blue Parrot).

Since then, Judy has become a leader among the new generation of motivation researchers (Harackiewicz & Asher, 2023). Her research represents an exemplary melding of personality and social psychology. I really admire the way her highly programmatic research moves fluidly back and forth between laboratory and field settings, basic and applied research, theory and practice. Whether in the laboratory or the field, her research is characterized by elegant experimental designs, including randomized controlled trials (RCTs) conducted in field settings, and statistical sophistication. She does not publish until she knows she has it right, and she replicates her findings. I happily incorporated her research into the motivation lectures in my Intro Psych course.

I keep, mostly in pectore, a “Faustian list” of studies I’d have sold my soul to have done myself. Judy is one of the few people with more than one entry on that list, including two early studies that challenged conventional wisdom about the effects of rewards on intrinsic motivation (Harackiewicz, 1979; Harackiewicz, Manderlink, & Sansone, 1984). I find her fieldwork on targeted interventions completely convincing (e.g., Harackiewicz et al., 2014; Harackiewicz & Priniski, 2018; Harackiewicz, Smith, & Priniski, 2016; Hulleman & Harackiewicz, 2009, 2021; Tibbetts, Harackiewicz, Priniski, & Canning, 2016). I deployed her utility-value intervention in my Intro Psych course and encouraged students and colleagues to do likewise (Kihlstrom, 2014); and I wish that someone would extend it to the other social sciences, and to the arts and humanities as well (hint, hint).

Others in this room can speak to these accomplishments more authoritatively than I. For myself, I’d like to trace the deep background of Judy’s scholarship. I’ve always liked William James’s injunction, somewhere, that psychology should be taught from a historical perspective, thus linking it with the humanities. One way to do this is to trace researchers’ academic lineages, discovering connections between their work and their advisors, and their advisors’ advisors – the kind of Biblical “begats” that my wife Lucy calls "the son of the son of the son of...".

Harvard 1

My own work on motivation is very recent (Kihlstrom, 2019a, 2019b), and very far from Judy’s interests, so she didn’t get any of her inspiration from me.

Actually, though, in my undergraduate experimental methods class I worked in the laboratory of Nicholas Longo, a comparative psychologist trained by Mort Bitterman, who was then working on instrumental conditioning in goldfish (e.g., Longo & Bitterman, 1959). Bitterman himself became famous for his studies of conditioning in the octopus . In the experiment, fish who pressed a submerged paddle were rewarded with some goldfish flakes, at which time the illumination of the aquarium also brightened briefly. The fish learned to press the paddle to get food; but we were surprised to observe an increase in paddle-pressing in the control group as well, which got only the change in illumination. Having read in Intro about Harry Harlow’s studies of the manipulation drive in monkeys (Harlow, 1953; Harlow, Harlow, & Meyer, 1950) – studies that helped nail the coffin shut on drive theory and opened up the possibility of non-biological, cognitive theories of motivation centered on constructs like curiosity and interest – I thought that something similar might have been happening in the fish. But Longo didn’t pursue it, and neither did I. I don’t think I ever discussed that experience with Judy.

On the other hand, Judy comes from a long line of Harvard psychologists who were very much interested in motivation. My graduate advisor at the University of Pennsylvania was Martin T. Orne, a Harvard-trained social psychologist as well as a psychiatrist, whose ideas about ecological validity and demand characteristics are relevant not just to the motivation of subjects in psychological experiments (Orne, 1970), but by extension to the motivation of real people in real life as well (Kihlstrom, 2002, 2020).

Orne's own mentor was Robert W. White, who published an important Psych Review paper on competence or effectance motivation – the need to explore and deal effectively with one’s environment (White, 1959). White, in turn, was a student of Henry Murray, who produced an extensive taxonomy of human social motives such as achievement, affiliation, and power (Murray, 1938) – and, with Christiana Morgan, invented the Thematic Apperception Test for their assessment (Murray, 1943). Murray's theory that behavior results from the interaction of personal needs with environmental press is an early example of Lewin's “Grand Truism”, as Ned Jones (1985, p. 84) called it, that B = f(P, E); and a foreshadowing of the modern Doctrine of Interactionism that links personality and social psychology (Bowers, 1973; Kihlstrom, 2013), and which guides Judy’s research.

As a psychologist, Harry Murray was sui generis. He had an MD (from Columbia), and he was interested in psychoanalysis, but his PhD (from Cambridge) was in biochemistry. So, Judy’s psychologicial roots could stop there. On the other hand, Murray succeeded Morton Prince as director of Harvard’s Psychological Clinic, and Prince was a close friend and colleague of William James. James was senior to Prince by 14 years It's possible that James actually taught Prince at Harvard, I just don't know, but Prince did consider James to be a sort of mentor. James coined the term dissociation to characterize the abnormalities that interested Prince, and he and Prince joined with others in what became known as the “Boston School” of psychopathology and psychotherapy (Ellenberger, 1970; Taylor, 2000).

Prince had little to say about motivation -- he was mostly interested in the unconscious; but James had a great deal to say about it, not least in his chapters on habit and will in the Principles (1890/1980). In addition, James devoted an entire lecture in his Talks to Teachers to the problem of stimulating and maintaining student interest (1899, Chapter X). If Judy is not a direct intellectual descendant of James (and not every American psychologist is!) she is at least James-adjacent. James was senior to Prince by 14 years It's possible that James actually taught Prince at Harvard, I just don't know, but Prince did consider James to be a sort of mentor.

With all due respect to G. Stanley Hall, psychology in America began with James at Harvard, so that seems to be an appropriate place to stop any psychologist’s academic tree. Of course, James had his own teachers -- or at least influences. One of those was C.S. Peirce (pronounced Perss), who attended Harvard at the same time as James. Peirce was a chemist and a logician, but after he joined the faculty at Johns Hopkins he collaborated with Joseph Jastrow, then a graduate student, on the very first study of what we would now call "subliminal perception" (actually, an attack on the very notion of the limen). Jastrow was the first to receive a PhD in psychology (as opposed to philosophy) from an American university, and their paper was the first piece of psychological research to be published in an American scientific journal. They invented random assignment, and introduced test statistics before Pearson and Fisher made them famous. Jastrow, in turn, was the first professor of psychology at Wisconsin. He had an interest in the unconscious, discovered the duck-rabbit reversible figure, organized the psychology exhibition at the 1893 Columbian Exposition in Chicago, invented “APA Style”, and helped found the American Association of University Professors (Blumenthal, 1990). He may have introduced Clark Hull to hypnosis.

But wait, there’s more! At Morgan's urging, Murray had spent part of 1925 in Switzerland studying with C.G. Jung, and he was appointed Assistant Director at the Harvard Psychological Clinic largely because of his familiarity with Jung's theories. This was not the Jung of the collective unconscious and flying saucers. This was the Jung after his break with Freud, the Jung of the word-association test (1910) and the theory of psychological types (1921/1971); the Jung who published multiple papers in the American Journal of Psychology. So, if Judy is James-adjacent, maybe she’s Jung-adjacent too.

Strengthening the Harvard connection, Jung got an honorary degree from the University in the great tercentenary celebrations of 1936, leading Freud to complain to Murray that he hadn’t gotten it instead (Roazen, 2003). In fact, Freud was the Psychology Department’s first choice; but Harvard didn’t want any no-shows at its big party, and Freud was deemed too old and frail to be able to make the trip. The others on the shortlist were Pierre Janet (Freud’s great rival, and a big influence on Prince, but who was also getting on in years); and, remarkably, Jean Piaget – whose work, though known to American psychology since the 1920s (Piaget, 1926, 1931), really didn’t capture the imagination until long after World War II (Flavell, 1963).

Jung took his medical degree from the University of Basel, and then worked at the Burgholzi Medical Clinic, a psychiatric hospital, under Eugen Bleuler, who gave schizophrenia its name. Bleuler was interested in the new psychological tests, and gave Jung the Word Association Test to work on.

Cornell

As with so many of us, Judy’s scholarly interests began before graduate school. While an undergraduate at Cornell, she worked with Wade Boykin, an experimental psychologist (as they were called then), on a study of epistemic curiosity inspired by Daniel Berlyne’s (1960) theory of cognitive complexity (Boykin & Harackiewicz, 1981). As a Michigan graduate student, Boykin had done research on the Head Start program (e.g., Boykin & Arkes, 1974), and has since become a leader in research on the motivational and structural factors underlying racial disparities in scholastic achievement. This undergraduate research experience foreshadowed Judy’s later research on intrinsic motivation and interest, so let’s call her Berlyne-adjacent.

Berlyne took his bachelor's and master's degrees from Cambridge, and taught at the University of St. Andrews. His PhD was from Yale, under Clark Hull, which links him to Jastrow and Peirce. While in New Haven, he taught at Brooklyn College before returning for several years to the UK, teaching at Aberdeen, before taking his final position at Toronto.

Boykin’s advisor at Michigan was Edward Walker, who argued that “Maximum benefit from a course derives from successful utilization of student motives” (Walker, 1963, p. 250). Walker had begun graduate school at Iowa, a hotbed of Hull-Spence learning theory, with its focus on biological drives, but at Michigan he became interested in nonbiological motives, like curiosity and interest. Although he came independently to the problem of complexity, he was very much influenced by Berlyne’s ideas (Walker, 1964, 1978, 1980a). Whereas most research on complexity had involved relatively simple stimulus materials, such as two-dimensional figures and letter strings, Walker chased Berlyne’s inverted-U function in a series of experiments in which Scottish tartans, drawings of theatrical sets, and both representational and abstract art of varying complexity were presented to subjects with varying exposure to art (Walker, 1970a, 1981). More important, Walker emphasized what he called psychological complexity rather than stimulus complexity – that is to say, both the mental representation of complexity and the amount of complexity that the individual was prepared to manage (Walker, 1973, 1980b). People may prefer moderate levels of complexity at the outset, but they are interested in higher levels, and the more they’re exposed to it, the more complexity they like. Exposure to complexity increases interest in complexity, creating a virtuous cycle. Epistemic curiosity feeds on itself.

Walker has been called “one of the last true generalists” in psychology (Dewsbury, 2012, p. 283) – and, indeed, he published on a wide range of topics including animal and human learning and memory, sensation and perception, aesthetics, social psychology, clinical psychology and psychiatry, and education. A dedicated basic researcher, he argued that experimental psychology found its justification in social relevance (Walker, 1969, 1970b).

Even if many other generalists followed him, Walker was a pretty interesting fellow. For example, in 1952 he volunteered to serve as a subject in Desert Rock IV, the kind of experiment only the Pentagon could dream up: a study of the effect on attitudes toward atomic warfare of witnessing an above-ground nuclear bomb detonated only four miles away. Think of it as The Mother of All Randomized Control Trials.

When Walker's interests departed from the narrow constraints of classical drive theory being promoted at Iowa, he was put on waivers and finished his PhD at Stanford before taking up his faculty post at Michigan. His actual dissertation was on visual discrimination, which seems far from his original interests in learning and motivation, but he did manage to do a study – perhaps the one forbidden at Iowa -- on the physiology of drive while in residence at Stanford. Perhaps on account of his experience at Iowa, Walker had a reputation at Michigan for his willingness to sponsor dissertations far beyond his own research interests – which may speak to his respect for intrinsic as opposed to extrinsic motivation. For better or worse, as a member of an NSF panel, he codified the two-semester division of the introductory course into “hard” and “soft” psychology (the two-semester Intro course is itself, now, only a fond memory).

Harvard 2

Judy and I did a little work together at Harvard and afterwards (Kihlstrom & Harackiewicz, 1982, 1990), but as a graduate student she also published with David Kenny (Kenny & Harackiewicz, 1979) and Chick Judd (Judd & Harackiewicz, 1980), and got much of her statistical savvy from them (and from Bob Rosenthal). Kenny studied with Donald Campbell at Northwestern, and you can think of Judy’s intervention studies as consistent with Campbell’s vision of “the experimenting society”. Chick’s advisor at Columbia was Morton Deutsch, who was a student of Kurt Lewin’s at MIT – and there is nothing so practical as Judy’s theories.

Campbell’s dissertation supervisors at Berkeley were Harold E. Jones and Robert Tryon. While working with Jones, he was part of the research group that produced The Authoritarian Personality. Later, with Donald Fiske, he invented the multitrait-multimethod matrix for demonstrating construct validity (Campbell & Fiske, 1959). His treatises on experimental, quasi-experimental, and unobtrusive methods (Campbell, Stanley, & Gage, 1963; Webb, Campbell, Schwartz, & Sechrest, 1966) are classics in the literature on applied and policy research.

Jones’s advisor at Columbia was R.S. Woodworth, at first a student of James’s at Harvard and later of James McKeen Cattell at Columbia. Woodworth’s S-O-R theory of learning, with its interjection of the Organism between Stimulus and Response, emphasized the motivational state of the learning organism; it can be viewed as an early expression of person-situation interactionism. Woodworth’s Personal Data Sheet counts as the first paper-and-pencil personality questionnaire, and he co-founded the Psychological Corporation to facilitate the publication of the new psychological tests. Known in his time as the “dean of American psychology”, his monumental Experimental Psychology went through three editions (1938, 1954, and 1971) and was the “bible” for several generations of experimental psychologists.

Tryon’s advisor was Edward C. Tolman: his thesis was on individual differences in learning (albeit in rats). Tolman completed his PhD under Hugo Munsterberg, who had been a student of Wundt’s at Leipzig, and who had been recruited by James to take over the psychological laboratory at Harvard; and by Herbert S. Langfeld, who had been a student of Titchener (who, of course, had also been a student of Wundt). When you go deep enough, sometimes the roots get tangled.

Lewin’s advisor, fittingly, was Hermann Lotze, a founding Gestalt theorist. Lotze’s advisor was Carl Stumpf, who in turn studied with Ernst Weber and Gustav Fechner, the founders of psychophysics – and perforce of scientific psychology itself.

Michigan

New roots can be established even after a tree is matured, and something like this happened with the late Paul Pintrich, a professor of educational psychology at Michigan. Both Judy and Paul were interested in achievement motivation, and both were critical of normative goal theory, which holds that mastery and performance goals are in opposition (Harackiewicz, Barron, Pintrich, Elliot, & Thrash, 2002; Harackiewicz & Linnenbrink, 2005). Just as important, Pintrich encouraged Judy to reach out to other venues, and audiences, for her work. Prior to the mid-1990s, Judy had published almost exclusively in journals like JPSP, which are primarily interested in the theoretical implications of research. But beginning in the late ‘90s she began publishing in journals of education research, which were primarily interested in the practical and policy implications of psychological research and theories. In this way, she was able to bring her basic research and theory to an audience that would be able to appreciate its practical implications, and put her ideas into action.

Pintrich’s advisor at Michigan was Phyllis Blumenfeld, a UCLA graduate who studied students’ engagement with classroom and learning activities, but he was also mentored at Michigan by Wilbert (Bill) McKeatchie. McKeachie’s classic Teaching Tips (14^th ed., 2014) has been an essential guide for generations of college teachers since its first appearance as a mimeographed handout in 1949 (see also McKeachie, 2003).

McKeachie’s dissertation committee included Donald Marquis, then a prominent learning theorist (Hilgard & Marquis, 1940), and Theodore Newcomb. Even before he published his dissertation on attitude conformity, his interests turned permanently to education. Early in his career, he served on a committee to review undergraduate teaching in psychology (Buxton, 1952). Later, he chaired the NSF committee that codified the two-semester, hard-soft version of Intro (McKeachie et al., 1961). I made Teaching Tips required reading, and the basis for class discussions, when I took my turn teaching Berkeley’s “Teaching Psychology” course, required of all graduate students in the Department, supplementing his chapter on “Motivation in the College Classroom” with a healthy dose of Harackiewicz.

Marquis did his dissertation research at Yale, working with Ernest “Jack” Hilgard (an instructor at Yale before he decamped to Stanford) and Raymond Dodge (who had been Hilgard’s advisor as well). Dodge, who invented the tachistoscope for controlling brief stimulus presentations, was a student of Benno Erdmann, a philosopher at the University of Halle.

Newcomb was a student of Gardner Murphy at Columbia. Murphy, identified as a social psychologist, was a pioneer in parapsychological research, and also promoted a “biosocial” view of personality. His PhD was from Columbia, working under Woodworth. More tangles.

Judy is one of those rare creatures in academia: the student who became not just a colleague but also a friend. She and Cliff hosted me on several visits to New York, and we spent a fair amount of time together at the theatre. Glengarry Glen Ross with Joe Mantegna; Hurlyburly with William Hurt and Judith Ivey, Christopher Walken and Sigourney Weaver; Stephen Sondheim’s Pacific Overtures; The Rise and Fall of the City of Mahagonny at the Metropolitan Opera, with Teresa Stratas in one of her signature roles. For these and many other kindnesses, I’ll always be grateful to them both. My only regret has been that I was unable to interest her in hypnosis research! But looking over her career, the work she's done, and the wonderful students and post-docs she’s fostered here and at Columbia across five decades, I don’t regret it at all.

References

Berlyne, D. N. (1960). Conflict, arousal, and curiosity. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Blumenthal, A. L. (1990). The intrepid Joseph Jastrow. In G. Kimble, C. White & M. Wertheimer (Eds.), Portraits of pioneers in psychology (pp. in press). Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum.

Bowers, K. S. (1973). Situationism in psychology -- Analysis and a critique. Psychological Review, 80, 307-336. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0035592

Boykin, A. W., & Arkes, H. R. (1974). Processing time and complexity preference in preschool children. Psychological Record, 24(2), 259-265.

Boykin, A. W., & Harackiewicz, J. (1981). Epistemic curiosity and incidental recognition in relation to degree of uncertainty: Some general trends and intersubject differences. British Journal of Psychology, 72(1), 65-72. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8295.1981.tb02162.x

Buxton, C. E., Cofer, C. N., Gustad, J. W., MacLeod, R. B., McKeachie, W. J., & Wolfle, D. (1952). Improving undergraduate instruction in psychology: Report of a study group supported by the Carnegie Corporation of New York and the Grant Foundation which met at Cornell University, June 27 to August 16, 1951. New York: MacMillan.

Campbell, D. T., & Fiske, D. W. (1959). Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix. Psychological Bulletin, 56, 82-105. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0046016

Campbell, D. T., Stanley, J. C., & Gage, N. L. (1963). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research. Boston: Houghton, Mifflin.

Dewsbury, D. A. (2012). The fate of the generalist: Edward L. Walker (1914−1997) as a case study. Review of General Psychology, 16(3), 283-297. doi: https://doi.org/10.1037/a0026815

Ellenberger, H. F. (1970). The discovery of the unconscious: The history and evolution of dynamic psychiatry. New York: Basic Books.

Flavell, J. (1963). The developmental psychology of Jean Piaget. Princeton: Van Nostrand Reinhold.

Harackiewicz, J. M. (1979). The effects of reward contingency and performance feedback on intrinsic motivation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37(8), 1352-1363. doi: https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.37.8.1352

Harackiewicz, J. M., & Asher, M. W. (2023). The utility value of a broad, comprehensive theory of motivation. Motivation Science, 9(1), 13-14. doi: https://doi.org/10.1037/mot0000279

Harackiewicz, J. M., Barron, K. E., Pintrich, P. R., Elliot, A. J., & Thrash, T. M. (2002). Revision of achievement goal theory: Necessary and illuminating. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(3), 638-645. doi: https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.94.3.638

Harackiewicz, J. M., Canning, E. A., Tibbetts, Y., Giffen, C. J., Blair, S. S., Rouse, D. I., & Hyde, J. S. (2014). Closing the social class achievement gap for first-generation students in undergraduate biology. Journal of Educational Psychology, 106(2), 375-389. doi: https://doi.org/10.1037/a0034679

Harackiewicz, J. M., & Linnenbrink, E. A. (2005). Multiple achievement goals and multiple pathways for learning: The agenda and impact of Paul R. Pintrich. Educational Psychologist, 40(2), 75-84. doi: https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep4002_2

Harackiewicz, J. M., Manderlink, G., & Sansone, C. (1984). Rewarding pinball wizardry: Effects of evaluation and cue value on intrinsic interest. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 47(2), 287-300. doi: https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.47.2.287

Harackiewicz, J. M., & Priniski, S. J. (2018). Improving student outcomes in higher education: The science of targeted intervention. Annual Review of Psychology, 69, 409-435. doi: https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-122216-011725

Harackiewicz, J. M., Smith, J. L., & Priniski, S. J. (2016). Interest matters: The importance of promoting interest in education. Policy Insights from the Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 3(2), 220-227. doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/2372732216655542

Harlow, H. F. (1953). Mice, monkeys, men, and motives. Psychological Review, 60, 23-32. doi:https://doi.org/10.1037/h0056040

Harlow, H. F., Harlow, M. K., & Meyer, D. R. (1950). Learning motivated by a manipulation drive. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 40, 228-234. doi: https://doi.org/10.1037/h0056906

Hilgard, E. R., & Marquis, D. G. (1940). Conditioning and learning. New York, London,: D. Appleton-Century Company.

Horner, M. S. (1969). Fail: Bright women. Psychology Today, 3(6), 36-38, 62.

Horner, M. S. (1970). Femininity and successful achievement: A basic inconsistency. In J. Bardwick, E. M. Douvan, M. S. Horner & D. Gutmann (Eds.), Feminine personality and conflict. Belmont, Ca: Brooks/Cole.

Hulleman, C. S., & Harackiewicz, J. M. (2009). Promoting interest and performance in high school science classes. Science, 326(5958), 1410-1412. doi: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1177067

Hulleman, C. S., & Harackiewicz, J. M. (2021). The utility‑value intervention. In A. J. C. G. M. Walton (Ed.), Handbook of wise interventions: How social psychology can help people change (pp. 100-125). New York: Guilford.

James, W. (1890/1980). Principles of Psychology. Cambridge, Ma.: Harvard University Press.

James, W. (1899). Talks to teachers on psychology: And to students on some of life's ideals. New York: Henry Holt.

Jones, E. E. (1985). Major developments in social psychology since 1930. In G. Lindzey & E. Aronson (Eds.), Handbook of social psychology (2nd ed., Vol. 1, pp. 47-107). Reading, Ma.: Addison- Wesley.

Judd, C. M., & Harackiewicz, J. M. (1980). Contrast effects in attitude judgment: An examination of the accentuation hypothesis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 38(3), 390-398. doi: https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.38.3.390

Jung, C. G. (1910). The association method. American Journal of Psychology, 21, 219-269. doi: https://doi.org/10.2307/1413002

Jung, C. G. (1921/1971). Psychological types: Or, the psychology of the individual. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.

Kenny, D. A., & Harackiewicz, J. M. (1979). Cross-lagged panel correlation: Practice and promise. Journal of Applied Psychology, 64(4), 372-379. doi: https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.64.4.372

Kihlstrom, J. F. (2002). Demand characteristics in the laboratory and the clinic: Conversations and collaborations with subjects and patients. Prevention & Treatment [Special issue honoring Martin T. Orne], 5(1), Article_36c. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/1522-3736.5.1.536c

Kihlstrom, J. F. (2013). The person-situation interaction. In D. Carlston (Ed.), Oxford handbook of social cognition (pp. 786-805). New York: Oxford University Press.

Kihlstrom, J. F. (2014). How Students Learn -- and How We Can Help Them. Paper presented at the Workshop on "How Students Learn", sponsored by the GSI Teaching and Resource Center, University of California, Berkeley, March 19.

Kihlstrom, J. F. (2019a). The motivational unconscious. Personality & Social Psychology Compass, 13(5), e12466. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12466

Kihlstrom, J. F. (2019b). "The motivational unconscious": Teaching and learning guide. Personality & Social Psychology Compass, 13, e12470. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12470

Kihlstrom, J. F. (2020). Ecological validity and "ecological validity". Perspectives on Psychological Science, in press. doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691620966791

Kihlstrom, J. F., & Harackiewicz, J. M. (1982). The earliest recollection: A new survey. Journal of Personality, 50(2), 134-148. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.1982.tb01019.x

Kihlstrom, J. F., & Harackiewicz, J. M. (1990). An evolutionary milestone in the psychology of personality [essay review of Social Foundations of Thought and Action by Albert Bandura]. Psychological Inquiry, 1(1), 86-92. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15327965pli0101_23

Longo, N., & Bitterman, M. E. (1959). Improved apparatus for the study of learning in fish. American Journal of Psychology, 72(4), 616-620. doi: https://doi.org/10.2307/1419513

McClelland, D. C., Atkinson, J. W., Clark, R. A., & Lowell, E. L. (Eds.). (1953). The achievement motive. East Norwalk, CT: Appleton-Century-Crofts.

McClelland, D. C., Davidson, R. J., Saron, C., & Floor, E. (1980). The need for power, brain norepinephrine turnover and learning. Biological Psychology, 10(2), 93-102. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/0301-0511(80)90030-7

McClelland, D. C., Floor, E., Davidson, R. J., & Saron, C. (1980). Stressed Power Motivation, Sympathetic Activation, Immune Function, and Illness. Journal of Human Stress. doi: https://dx.org/080/0097840X.1980.9934531

McKeachie, W. J. (2003). William James's Talks to Teachers (1899) and McKeachie's Teaching Tips (1999). Teaching of Psychology, 30(1), 40-43. doi: https://doi.org/10.1207/S15328023TOP3001_09

McKeachie, W. J., Milholland, J. E., Cole, L. E., Hunt, W., Leeper, R., Ray, W., . . . Walker, E. L. (1961). Undergraduate curricula in psychology: Report of the Michigan conference supported by the National Science Foundation. Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman.

Murray, H. A. (1943). Thematic Apperception Test. Cambridge, Ma.: Harvard University Press.

Murray, H. A. (Ed.). (1938). Explorations in personality. New York: Oxford University Press.

Orne, M. T. (1970). Hypnosis, Motivation, and the ecological validity of the psychological experiment. In W. J. Arnold & M. M. Page (Eds.), Nebraska Symposium on Motivation (pp. 187-265). Lincoln, Ne: University of Nebraska Press.

Piaget, J. (1926). The language and thought of the child. Oxford: Harcourt, Brace.

Piaget, J. (1931). Children's philosophies. In C. Murchison (Ed.), Handbook of child psychology (pp. 377-391). Worcester, MA: Clark University Press.

Roazen, P. (2003). Interviews on Freud and Jung with Henry A. Murray in 1965. Journal of Analytical Psychology, 48(1), 1-27. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/1465-5922.t01-1-00001

Taylor, E. (2000). Psychotherapeutics and the Problematic Origins of Clinical Psychology in America. American Psychologist, 55(9), 1029. doi:https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.55.9.1029

Tibbetts, Y., Harackiewicz, J. M., Priniski, S. J., & Canning, E. A. (2016). Broadening Participation in the Life Sciences with Social–Psychological Interventions. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 15, es4. doi: https://dx.doi.org/10.1187/cbe.16-01-0001

Walker, E. L. (1963). Utiliizing student motivation for mastering content in psychology. In G. K. Smith (Ed.), Critical decisions in higher education. Washington, D.C.: Association for Higher Education.

Walker, E. L. (1964). Psychological complexity as the basis for a theory of motivation and choice. Nebraska Symposium on Motivation, 12, 47-97.

Walker, E. L. (1969). Experimental psychology and social responsibility. American Psychologist, 24(9), 862-868. doi: https://doi.org/10.1037/h0027984

Walker, E. L. (1970a). Complexity and preference in animals and men. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 169, 619-653. doi: https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-6632.1970.tb27005.x

Walker, E. L. (1970b). Relevant psychology is a snark. American Psychologist, 25(12), 1081-1086. doi: https://doi.org/10.1037/h0030295

Walker, E. L. (1973). Psychological complexity and preference: A hedgehog theory of behavior. In D. E. Berlyne & K. B. Madsen (Eds.), Pleasure, reward, preference (pp. 65-97). New York: Academic.

Walker, E. L. (1978). Introduction to D. Berlyne's "Curiosity and Learning". Motivation and Emotion, 2(2), 96.

Walker, E. L. (1980a). Berlyne's theoretical contributions to psychology. Motivation and Emotion, 4(2), 105-111. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00995191

Walker, E. L. (1980b). Psychological complexity and preference: A hedgehog theory of behavior. Belmont, Ca.: Brooks/Cole.

Walker, E. L. (1981). The quest for the inverted U. In H. I. Day (Ed.), Advances in intrinsic motivation and aesthetics (pp. 39-70). New York: Plenum.

Webb, E. J., Campbell, D. T., Schwartz, R. D., & Sechrest, L. (1966). Unobtrusive measures: Nonreactive research in the social sciences. Chicago,: Rand McNally.

White, R. W. (1959). Motivation reconsidered: The concept of competence. Psychological Review, 66(5), 297-333. doi: https://doi.org/10.1037/h0040934

Woodworth, R. S. (1938). Experimental psychology. New York: Holt.

Finding Her Roots: For Judy Harackiewicz on Her Retirement

Finding Her Roots:

For Judy Harackiewicz on Her Retirement