APPLIED PSYCHOLOGY: AN INTERNATIONAL REVIEW, 1999, 48 (4), 403418

Indigenisation of Psychology:
The Concept and its Practical Implementation
John G. Adair
University of Manitoba, Canada
Le concept, souvent mal compris, de psychologie indige`ne est examine dans
une perspective de meta-discipline, quautorise une etude de psychologie
sociale interculturelle. On discutera de laccent mis sur un aspect comme
etant inexact dans les faits, theoriquement trompeur et politiquement
dangereux.
The often misunderstood concept of indigenous psychologies is examined
from the meta-discipline perspective afforded by a social-psychological study
of the science. Motivation underlying the indigenisation movement, semantic
difculties with the concept, and models for indigenisation of the discipline
are examined. The commonly accepted building-block approach is of
increasing numbers of indigenous contributions leading to an emerging
indigenous psychology. An alternative, but often overlooked approach, is of
autochthonous discipline development leading to increasing numbers of
seasoned researchers creatively pursuing culturally relevant research. Both
approaches are intertwined and necessary for a more encompassing
denition and understanding of the indigenisation process. An overview of
the required elements for this broader denition indicate the need for
simultaneous pursuit of research in the local culture and autochthonous
discipline development, demands that can place the researcher in an essential
tension.

INTRODUCTION
An objective of international psychology is to encourage the spread and
development of the discipline of psychology into as many countries as

Requests for reprints should be sent to John G. Adair, Department of Psychology,

University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada R3T 2N2.
Email: Adair@ms.umanitoba.ca
The author wishes to express his appreciation to Angela Coelho, who read and commented
on versions of this manuscript.
c 1999 International Association of Applied Psychology

404

ADAIR

possible around the world. We believe that psychology can be of use in

solving social problems within each country and in promoting an
understanding of local thought and behaviour. It is believed that this
research may, in turn, feed insights back into mainstream (world)
psychology. Although we would like to be able to quickly make psychology
truly international, developing the discipline across cultures and languages
is not without problems.
Psychology had its origins in Europe, but it is the contemporary
discipline developed in the United States that has been imported into
countries around the world. This imported discipline is acultural in content
and positivistic in methodology. Research ndings are assumed to apply
universally, and a quantitative, hypothesis-testing research approach
predominates. By contrast, researchers in developing countries feel there
is an ill t of method and the need for a science that is culture- or contextspecic. Methods that are holistic, qualitative, and phenomenological, are
felt to be more appropriate and compatible to their cultures. This has led
to numerous calls for the development of what are called indigenous
psychologies. Indeed, these calls have been so numerous that there is
occasional reference to an indigenous psychology movement (Sinha,
1997).
The indigenisation movement began about two decades ago. It received
an early impetus from the Edinburgh Symposium held in 1982 and
published as a special issue in the International Journal of Psychology two
years later (Sinha & Holtzman, 1984). Since then, researchers in
developing countries have called for the pursuit of indigenous contributions in the form of concepts or applied research on national problems.
This movement has evolved into a recognised research topic area within
cross-cultural psychology. Durganand Sinhas (1997) chapter in the
Handbook of cross-cultural psychology and Kim and Berrys (1993) book
Indigenous psychologies reect the considerable identity and visibility this
research has achieved.

DEFINITIONS: INDIGENOUS PSYCHOLOGIES;

INDIGENISATION
Although reied in this way, the meaning of indigenous psychology and
how it is to be achieved is vaguely conceptualised and not well understood,
even by those who call for indigenous psychologies within various
countries. Indigenous psychology is an unusual term as it is used here.
How can something imported (psychology) be indigenous? Presumably the

INDIGENISATION OF PSYCHOLOGY

405

meaning is that the process of indigenisation or modifying the imported

discipline ts the culture so well that it is made to appear as if it were
indigenous.
Sinha (1997) agreed that there was confusion about meaning, and
attempted to sort this out by analysing a number of the denitions that had
been proposed. He identied four threads underlying the set of
denitions he considered: psychological knowledge should (a) arise from
within the culture, (b) reect local behaviours, (c) be interpreted within a
local frame of reference, and (d) yield results that are locally relevant. In
preparation for a content analysis of indigenous progress in Indian
psychology (Adair, Puhan, & Vohra, 1993), I dened indigenous research
as work that emanates from, adequately represents, and reects back upon
the cultural context in which the behaviour is observed. In short, an
indigenous psychology is dened as a discipline that is culturally
appropriate (Azuma, 1984; Moghaddam & Taylor, 1986). An indigenous
psychology is not a psychology of aboriginals, nor is it limited to native
peoples or other groups of people. It is also not a psychology of lay
persons, although Sinha (1997, p.132) argues that it should address the
daily, mundane activities of people, and Kim, Park, and Park (this issue)
argue for the need early in research to capture the thinking and
expressions of the people.
The literature on indigenous psychology from a variety of perspectives,
consistently suggests that indigenisation, the process by which an
indigenous psychology develops, evolves through a characteristic series
of stages (Atal, 1981; Azuma, 1984; D. Sinha, 1986; J.B.P. Sinha, 1984). I
have described this evolution (Adair, 1996) as growing acknowledgement
of the limitations of Western models, an increasing acceptance of calls for
problem-oriented research on national concerns, and a deepening
sensitivity to the rich potential that exists in local customs and behaviours
peculiarly driven by indigenous traditions.
Most denitions of indigenous psychology focus on the content of the
discipline. What need to be changed are the methods, tests, concepts, and
theories, to make the discipline more relevant or applicable to the culture.
Berry, Poortinga, Segall, and Dasen (1992), for example, identify four
elements within Western psychology that make the discipline ethnocentric:
(a) the items or stimuli in tests, (b) the methods and instruments used, (c)
the theoretical concepts, and (d) the topics selected for investigation. In his
article in this special issue, Poortinga suggests that these four elements
could be modied to make any indigenous psychology just as ethnocentric.
Sinha (1997) describes these as levels of indigenisation. He calls the rst
two indigenisation of methods; the latter two are a form of conceptual
indigenisation. For him, the goal was to make the indigenous discipline
culturally sensitive. For most researchers in developing countries, this is

406

ADAIR

the goal of indigenisation of the discipline: Alter the content of the

psychology to make it culturally sensitive.

INDIGENOUS CONTRIBUTIONS VS. INDIGENOUS

PSYCHOLOGIES
This imprecise denition of indigenous psychology is evident in calls for
indigenisation of the discipline. Calls for indigenisation are usually
accompanied by descriptions or anecdotal examples of culture-specic
research: D az-Guerreros (1977) historic-socio-cultural premises of the
Mexicans losophia de vida; J.B.P. Sinhas (1984) nurturant task leader;
Pande and Naidus (1992) concept of detachment as an adaptive
behavioural response of Indians; and Salazars (Salazar & Salazar, 1998)
observation of the unique relationship of national and regional identities
among Latin Americans, illustrate indigenous contributions. Such contributions are indigenous because they are claimed to be culture-specic.
They may or may not be universal or cross-indigenous (Enriquez, 1993);
that has not been tested yet. However, they are invariably pointed to with
pride as examples of what could be achieved within an indigenous
psychology. They are taken by many as models for how to conduct
indigenous research, and it is commonly (though mistakenly) assumed that
merely increasing the number of such indigenous contributions will, like
building blocks, ultimately lead to an emerging indigenous psychology.
The error is in equating indigenous contributions with an indigenous
psychology.
Large numbers of researchers from developing countries have taken up
the banner of indigenous psychology, yet because there is confusion and
uncertainty over how to go about indigenising the discipline, some may be
misled into engaging in inadequate attempts called cosmetic indigenisation (Sinha, 1988). Indigenous contributions dene for them the meaning
of indigenous and become the model for their culturally appropriate
research. As a result, some have been led to equate indigenous research
with either (a) a narrow search for uniquely native traits or concepts, (b)
early religious or philosophical writings, (c) linguistically dened constructs, or, less imaginatively, (d) mere identication of differences from
Western research ndings.
This model confuses indigenisation as a goal with its function as a
process to develop an appropriate psychology for the culture. An
investigator, accepting the need to indigenise psychological research by
one of these models, may research culturally unique traits or concepts
without regard to how commonly they occur, how they integrate
conceptually, or how behaviourally meaningful they are to contemporary
society.

INDIGENISATION OF PSYCHOLOGY

407

MODELS FOR INDIGENOUS PSYCHOLOGIES

Because more has been written about the inadequacies of Western
psychology than about how to develop an indigenous psychology,
researchers must look to previously published examples for guidance.
What has been written reveals a diversity of approaches. Many of these
were brought together in a book entitled Indigenous psychologies by Kim
and Berry (1993). The collection of chapters were not organised in any
particular manner, however, in a review of that book (Adair, 1994), I
observed that the chapters conveyed more than the 15 individual
contributions. Although there was not an indigenous psychology approach,
several of the approaches could be grouped together by their common
emphases. I categorised several of these into four alternative indigenous
psychology approaches or strategies: linguistic, empirical, applied, and
meta-discipline or pragmatic. The rst two represent what I would call
culture-based indigenisation. The latter two are discipline-based strategies.

Linguistic Approaches
The linguistic approach was exemplied by the works of Enriquez (1993)
and Ho (1993). Primary attention is paid to concepts within the native
language that capture the essence of thought, values, or behaviours within
the culture. Rather than an emphasis on their empirical validity,
identication of key indigenous concepts within the language is followed
by their semantic elaboration and emphasis on their cultural and
linguistic distinctiveness. Such an approach is often accompanied by a
more visible rejection of Western researchits terms and models, its
philosophy and methods, its etic possibilities, and of the English language
in which its research is promulgated.

Empirical Approaches
Empirical approaches, documenting the cultural distinctiveness of indigenous values, concepts, and behaviours, contrast sharply with the
linguistic approach. Although differing language may be involved, the
emphasis is on empirical testing and demonstrating a concepts cultural
distinctiveness. This approach is exemplied by D az-Guerreros (1977,
1993) ethnopsychology and his empirical search for verbal afrmations
(called historic-sociocultural premises) that typify the losoa de vida of
persons within Mexico. In a second example, Choi, Kim, and Choi (1993)
assessed the differential connotation of the words woori (Korean) and we
(English) to determine the indigenous meanings of social relationships in
Korean society. Documented differences in meaning by persons from the
native and Western cultures underscore their cultural uniqueness.

408

ADAIR

Applied Approach
Research that contributes to the resolution of national social problems is
indigenous in the sense that it focuses the discipline on the local context.
Although indigenisation may be thought to be an incidental consequence
of applied research, problem-focused research has been urged as an
intentional strategy (Ardila, 1993; Berry, 1993). For example, Berry (1993)
advocated a research focus on Canadian social problems: on multiculturalism, immigrant adaptation, aboriginal issues, second-language
learning, or Canadian identity. The greater similarity of Canadian culture
and language to that of the US may preclude the need to search for
indigenous concepts, and channel calls for indigenisation onto research
addressing national social problems.
Similar emphases are found in Latin America (Ardila, 1993), but for
different reasons. Although linguistically different from the US, the
historically substantial Western inuence on the Latin American culture
(Balan, 1983) may somewhat narrow the scope for indigenous developments. Promoting a substantial focus on the local culture through social
problem solution is readily seen as an appropriate indigenisation strategy.

Meta-discipline or Pragmatic Approaches

A meta-discipline approach pragmatically considers the factors inuencing
the focus of the national discipline on culturally relevant rather than on
universal variables. For example, Moghaddams (1993) account of Iranian
psychology from 19781981 emphasised the importance of numbers of
psychologists with a nationalistic focus and of the role played by
indigenous graduate research training, teaching materials, and research
tools. My own research (Adair et al., 1993) assumes that as a discipline
becomes more indigenous, an ever-widening circle of researchers become
increasingly sensitive to their own culture and more sophisticated in their
mastery of an indigenous approach. Such changes may be observed in the
published record of its accomplishments.

ANOTHER WAY OF LOOKING AT INDIGENOUS

PSYCHOLOGIES
Social Psychology of Science Perspective
In the remainder of this article I propose to explore the concept of the
indigenisation of psychology from the perspective of my empirical study of
the social psychology of the science, specically that aspect of the science
that leads to indigenous psychologies. My approach offers a different
perspective on the indigenisation process. The focus of the social
psychology of science approach is on the behavioural (rather than the

INDIGENISATION OF PSYCHOLOGY

409

content) elements through which the indigenisation process takes place.

From this perspective it is important to focus on the researcher as the
agent for change. What does the researcher need to do to make his or her
research more culturally appropriate? What about the researchers
abilities, background, colleagues, and resources that make it easy or
difcult for him or her to conduct research that is both culturally sensitive
and useful to society? How does the researcher become aware of the need
for an indigenous approach? Who makes the call for indigenisation and
who answers the call? These elements are my concerns within a social
psychology of science analysis of indigenous psychology and of the
indigenisation process. I have employed empirical methods: interviews,
mail surveys, bibliometric and content analyses to study how a basically
North American discipline gets imported, implanted, indigenised, and
developed to make a useful contribution within quite different societies
and cultures (Adair, 1992; Adair et al., 1993; Adair et al., 1995). As we
shall see, this perspective leads me to look at quite different variables and
processes than would a cross-cultural psychologist or one who is
attempting to advance an indigenous psychology within their culture.

Why the Need for Indigenous Psychologies?

To begin with, it might help to understand from this perspective the source
of the appeals for indigenous psychologies. Although it is generally
assumed that the need for indigenous psychologies is due to the ill t of the
theory, content, and method of mainstream psychology, the unique
character of the newly created discipline, special features of the society
to which psychology has been imported, and the researcher as the agent of
indigenous or non-indigenous research, all should be examined as potential
contributors.

Individual Researchers. Within a newly imported discipline, the vast

majority of researchers are either newly graduated psychologists or young
researchers still in training. Most are just beginning to establish themselves
as independent investigators. To these scholars, previous research serves as
a model for how research should be conducted, and topics to research are
readily selected from the journals. To become established as a
psychologist, conducting a replication of a Western study applied to their
own culture ensures a demonstration of their abilities as researchers and
yields some knowledge about the replicability of the phenomena within the
culture. However, it does not chart new ground for indigenous development.
Research training, whether experienced abroad or locally, focuses on
methodological rigour and research design. How to look for regularities

410

ADAIR

and patterns of behaviour in order to identify researchable problems is

seldom, if ever, taught. This training, plus their recent independence as
investigators, leads new researchers to a greater emphasis on method-t
rather than on a problem-centred approach to research.
Indigenous research is better suited to, or almost requires, a problemcentred approach, where the investigators attention is on the aspects of
behaviour within the culture and how it can be studied and explained. The
method to use is a secondary, or at least a later, consideration. As
researchers mature, or become more experienced or seasoned, they may
progressively adopt problem-centred approaches. Moreover, many psychologists who have received their research training abroad may no longer
be sensitive to problems within their own culture. Trained in Western
models with Western methods for research they will be poised to identify
research problems within the research literature rather than turn to
problems and behaviours within their native milieu.
The lack of models for culturally sensitive research within their native
country may also be a problem. Leading scholars from developing
countries often nd that their research that contains culturally unique
elements is readily publishable in foreign or international journals, so they
publish their indigenous research there rather than in their own country.
Researchers within the country are thereby denied access to this research
and the leadership function it may serve in the indigenisation process. This
problem is common across countries; but a single example is provided by
ngel and Smith (this issue).
O

Discipline and Societal Considerations. The newness of the discipline

also lends greater appeal to research method indigenisation. Within a
newly imported discipline, there is no theoretical base from which to
deduce hypotheses to test. Qualitative and descriptive methods to identify
patterns and regularities in thoughts and behaviours are needed. The
search should be for the meanings of behaviours at this early stage of
discipline development. An inductive rather than a deductive approach is
called for. Beyond these considerations, there may be culture-based
reasons for the rejection of Western-based methods and their replacement
by more holistic methodologies. The scientic study of thought and
behaviour may not t the values and temperament of some cultures
(Adair, 1999) where emotions and feelings are favoured as explanations of
behaviour over scientic analyses and dissections of behaviour.

``Front vs. Mass of Discipline

As part of this reconsideration of indigenous psychology a useful
distinction can be made between the scholarly leaders of the discipline

INDIGENISATION OF PSYCHOLOGY

411

who develop the theories and set the trends that others follow, and all the
others; the majority of psychologists within the country who will produce
the incremental research that forms the basic character of the discipline.
J.B.P. Sinha (1993), in making this distinction, referred to the former as the
front of psychology; the latter he called the bulk. I nd this to be a
useful conceptualisation for understanding the indigenisation process,
although I prefer more descriptive labels.
As a rule it is the cutting-edge researchers who search for indigenous
conceptualisation, and whose work promises to contribute to the
advancement of the discipline, both at the national and at the international
levels. The contributions of the late Durganand Sinha of India, Rogelio
D az-Guerrero of Mexico, and Michael Bond in Hong Kong, exemplify the
front of psychology in their respective countries. They assessed the
deciencies of the discipline applied to their culture, and perceptively
devised and promoted indigenous concepts and approaches. Although
slow to develop, these pioneering efforts are leading to an indigenous
psychology movement in developing countries. More than calls for
indigenous psychologies are required. For the task of insightful cultural
analysis, and conceptual and theoretical development, cutting-edge
researchers must pursue certain indigenisation strategies.
More members of the discipline, the contributors to normal science,
need to be involved in the indigenisation process. The seeds for theoretical
and conceptual development are generally sown by the front, however,
for the discipline to develop, it is necessary that these seeds fall on fertile
ground; that the mass, or contributors to normal science, be both
receptive and capable of researching and applying these concepts to
develop a broad base of indigenous knowledge. For the fertile soil and
development of an appropriate psychology, the mass needs strategies
that are adequately engaging and promote their growth and development.

Applied Research. An applied approach may be the most effective way

to promote the development of a culturally appropriate discipline, even
though it may not be best for the development of the discipline as a whole.
Such research focuses investigators on their own culture, has a higher
probability of success, builds investigator condence, and generates new
research problems within the culture to address (Ziman, 1971). Ziman,
writing about natural science discipline development, argues that through
this approach scholars in developing countries gain international reputations on unique topics of relevance to their local context, thereby further
strengthening the status of the local discipline. In particular, an applied
approach would engage the mass of psychologists within the country in
indigenous activities. Contrasted with method-oriented research to
demonstrate competence as a researcher, problem-oriented research,

412

ADAIR

whether guided by theory or not, can still be a useful direction to pursue. It

encourages researchers to solve a problem; not to demonstrate their
methodological rigour. It frees researchers from the shackles of
methodology (which is Western) to focus on that which can solve a
problem (which is indigenous).

DISCIPLINE DEVELOPMENT AND MAKING THE

RESEARCH CULTURALLY APPROPRIATE
The involvement of much of the discipline in the indigenisation process
suggests an underlying relationship between a developing discipline and
increasingly culturally sensitive research. To consider how these two
processes relate, it would be useful to begin by examining a case example
of the indigenisation process at work within a country in which increasing
sensitivity to its own culture was needed at the same time that it was
undergoing growth and change as a discipline.

Indigenisation of Canadian Psychology

Canadian psychology provides that case example. Indigenisation of
psychology is not exclusive to developing countries. Indeed, in every
country in the world outside the United States, the psychology developed
in the US is imported, has to take root, be tailored to the local culture, and
developed to become a useful discipline for that country. The indigenisation of Canadian psychology illustrates the processes that many countries
must eventually follow. The contexts will not be identical, but there are
sufcient similarities to provide a basis for discussion
Although on friendly terms, Canada has been overwhelmed by the
greater inuence of the United States, in academia and psychology as well
as in economic matters. There is much to be admired and emulated in
American psychology. In the beginning, Canadian psychology and US
psychology were one and the same. Indeed, the two countries even shared
granting agencies for some years (at least the US shared its resources with
our researchers). We adopted their Code of Ethics as our own, and our
departments sought APA clinical programme accreditation. However,
Canada is an independent country. Canadian psychology had to develop
and take on its own identity. This was not an easy process, and we
contributed to some of our own difculties.
Just as psychology was about to take off in our country, Canadian higher
education virtually exploded. From the mid-1960s to about the late 1970s,
the government invested considerable resources in our universities.
Enrolments and faculty expanded. New universities and new departments
of psychology were opened. Unfortunately, there were insufcient
Canadian-trained faculty to ll these new positions. Few universities had

INDIGENISATION OF PSYCHOLOGY

413

doctoral training programmes that were sufciently established to produce

the quantities of new PhDs that were required. As in developing countries
the pattern had been for Canadians to go abroad (to the US) for their
higher education. These US-trained Canadians were now insufcient to
staff the faculty positions that had been newly created. As a consequence,
Canada imported large numbers of new faculty, some from Europe, but
primarily from the US.
These US-born and certainly US-trained psychologists began teaching a
universalistic (mostly US-based) psychology to Canadian students.
Prejudice and discrimination against Blacks, the effects of Head Start
programmes in the States, bystander apathy in metropolitan New York
were commonly taught and were the examples found in US-authored and
-published textbooks. There was a dearth of Canadian research examples
for use in the classroom, and no help from supplementary teaching
materials because there were none. US-trained faculty typically did not
know what were Canadian issues, and there was relatively little research
on topics of national interest to Canadians. The excellent Canadian
research that was conducted (e.g. Lamberts work on bilingualism) was not
widely known among many faculty who read exclusively US journals and
belonged to the APA rather than becoming members of the Canadian
Psychological Association (CPA). Bain (1996) gives an impassioned
account of this period in Canadian psychology.
Although calls for Canadianisation of the social sciences became
common, in psychology primarily from John Berry (1974), it was difcult
for many of us to know how to respond. It was comparable in many ways to
the situation that prevails in many developing countries; and in many
respects the resolution or indigenisation of Canadian psychology could be
regarded as an analogue of the indigenisation process in developing
countries.
The resolution was gradual; it did not occur overnight. Indeed, it took
about 20 years in spite of great nancial resources made available to
Canadian universities and to Canadian psychology. Several developments
and policies were helpful in bringing about change. The rst step was to
close the door to any more imported faculty. Canadian First was the
instruction to all hiring committees, and was mandated by the government
and by universities to be included in announcements of academic positions.
The task of hiring Canadians was made possible in part by the graduation
of increasing numbers of new PhDs trained within newly established
graduate programmes.
As large numbers of new faculty, imported as well as Canadian-trained,
established their research programmes and became more seasoned
scholars, the amount and quality of their research began to increase and
improve. We had developed a critical mass within many areas of research

414

ADAIR

and increasingly this work began to focus and have impact on Canadian
national issues ageing, family, and women at workand on topics that
were of uniquely Canadian concernmulticulturalism, immigration,
acculturation, bilingualism, stereotypes, and prejudice. This was facilitated
by the national granting agency targeting funding for some of these topic
areas.
As a rst step in addressing the need for Canadian textbooks and
supplementary teaching material, edited books of readings were produced
that brought together examples of Canadian research on culturally
relevant issues. Concurrent with developing research personnel, the
infrastructure for the discipline developed: two new journals were added,
a code of ethics was drafted and adopted (Canadian Psychological
Association, 1986), CPA began to assess and accredit its own clinical
training programmes, ultimately in joint site visits and accreditations with
the APA (Dobson & Dobson, 1993), and a national ofce independent of
any university was established for the Canadian Psychological Association
and manned by a full-time Executive Director.
The culmination of the Canadianisation process I mark by the
publication of a Canadian-authored textbook (Alcock, Carment, &
Sadava, 1988) that highlighted Canadian research as part of the world
literature in social psychology. The signicance of this publication is the
realisation that volumes of research had accumulated; enough Canadian
research to compile and distil into the core knowledge of a textbook, and
for the lecture halls of Canadian universities. In Canada, the number of
researchers and the quality of the research had increased greatly over the
three decades. We have contributed much to the understanding of
Canadian society, as well as to the universal understanding of behaviour.
That there is a distinctively Canadian psychology to market commercially afrms the vitality and relevance of the discipline that we teach.
Today we have an indigenous, autochthonous, mature, and independent
psychology.

Lessons Learned from Canadianisation

The indigenisation process was much broader than merely becoming aware
of Canadian issues and shifting research to culturally appropriate topics.
Discipline development was as important as the cultural sensitivity of the
researcher to the need for indigenisation. Although government money
and other resources were available, the indigenisation process was gradual
and extended over a long period of time. To many of us it was slower than
we would have anticipated. But that may have reected the complexity of
the process and the many elements that had to fall into place before
Canadian psychology could achieve its current status.

INDIGENISATION OF PSYCHOLOGY

415

The Canadian discipline had to develop to the point where we had (a) a
critical mass of researchers, (b) a number of whom had developed into
condent scholars capable of independent problem-centred research, and
(c) had become aware or sensitive to thoughts and behaviours unique to
their culture. These scholars included (d) the culturally appropriate
variables in their research, and/or (e) researched topics of importance to
society. Over time we had (f) made a number of original research
contributions to local thought and behaviour and to national social issues
(as well as to universal knowledge), that (g) were then compiled and
described in locally edited/authored textbooks, and (h) could be utilised in
more culturally relevant curricula and classroom teaching. We had also (i)
developed graduate training programmes that made the discipline selfsustaining and no longer dependent on foreign training.
In conclusion, the goal of developing a culturally appropriate
psychologya psychology of Canadawas achieved through the dual
processes of making the research more culturally sensitive and relevant,
and developing the discipline into a mature, autochthonous psychology.
Both processes were essential for the indigenisation of Canadian
psychology. Similar processes and stages will likely need to be followed
by disciplines in countries seeking to develop indigenous psychologies.

A BROADER DEFINITION
The foregoing has implications for the denitions of indigenous psychology
and of indigenisation that were discussed at the outset. The two aspects
described earlier need to be included in our denitions and understanding
of these concepts. The goal of an indigenous psychology remains the same:
to create a psychology that is appropriate for the culture; but there are two
aspects or subgoalsmaking the research more culturally sensitive and
appropriate, and making the discipline autochthonous.1 By autochthonous
is meant a psychology of the country that is independent of its imported
origins, and which stands on its own in addressing local problems and in
providing its own local training and textbooks.
These processes are intertwined. Culturally sensitive contributions are
necessary for stimulating investigators indigenous research and for
providing models of what it can achieve and how to proceed. Discipline
development, on the other hand, strengthens the base of researchers who
will conduct this research. Within a new discipline, there are a greater
1
I credit my Latin American collaborators (I cannot recall whether it was Rolando D azLoving or Jose Salazar) who have translated my talks into Spanish, with suggesting this term.
They proposed it to distinguish a psychology of aboriginals, psicolog a indigenista, from a
psychology appropriate to the culture, psicolog a autoctona. This terminology led me to
introduce the concept of an autochthonous psychology.

416

ADAIR

number of new graduates and researchers who are learning the science, i.e.
developing their skills. They need feedback, and models for research to
shape their work. They need the advice of seasoned researchers to guide
their development. As researchers gain condence and sophistication, they
are able to see problems that require solution rather than problems that
might t textbook methods. The more developed the discipline, the more
scientists of this sort will be available to focus on their own cultures
problems. Hence culture sensitivity and autochthonous development are
intertwined.
This conceptualisation has important implications for the development
of indigenous psychologies. There will be no short-cuts to their
development. Rather than prescriptive models for action, indigenous
research developments will come about primarily from hard investigative
work on mature psychological explanations of behaviour that are found to
be typical within each country. Formulation and testing of indigenous
concepts or methods should still be encouraged. They serve useful
functions as indigenous contributions. However, greater attention needs
to be given to making the discipline autochthonous. An indigenous
psychology then can be conceived as a mature, self-sustaining scientic
discipline addressing the needs of the culture or country.

REFERENCES
Adair, J.G. (1992). Empirical study of indigenization and development of the discipline in
developing countries. In S. Iwawaki, Y. Kashima, & K. Leung (Eds.), Innovations in crosscultural psychology (pp.6274), Amsterdam: Swets & Zeitlinger.
Adair, J.G. (1994). Review of U. Kim & J. Berry (Eds.), Indigenous psychologies:
Research and experience in cultural contexts, [Newbury Park, CA: Sage]. Journal of
Multilingual and Multi-cultural Development, 15, 360363.
Adair, J.G. (1996). The indigenous psychology bandwagon: Cautions and considerations. In
J. Pandey, D. Sinha, & D. P. S. Bhawak (Eds.), Asian contributions to cross-cultural
psychology (pp.5058). New Delhi: Sage.
n de la psicolog a: El caso
Adair, J.G. (1999). Estudios empiricos del desarollo e indigenzacio
de Latinoamerica. [Empirical studies of indigenization and development of Psychology.
The case of Latin America]. Revista de Psicologa Social y Personalidad, 15, 114.
Adair, J.G., Pandey, J., Begum, H.A., Puhan, B.N., & Vohra, N. (1995). Indigenization and
development of the discipline: Perceptions and opinions of Indian and Bangladeshi
psychologists. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 26, 392407.
Adair, J.G., Puhan, B.N., & Vohra, N. (1993). Indigenization of psychology: Empirical
assessment of progress in Indian research. International Journal of Psychology, 28, 149
169.
Alcock, J.E., Carment, D.W., & Sadava, S.W. (1988). A textbook of social psychology.
Scarborough, ON: Prentice-Hall.
Ardila, R. (1993). Latin American psychology and world psychology: Is integration
possible? In U. Kim & J. W. Berry (Eds.), Indigenous psychologies: Research and
experience in cultural context (pp.170176). London: Sage.
Atal, Y. (1981). Call for indigenization. International Social Science Journal, 33, 189197.

INDIGENISATION OF PSYCHOLOGY

417

Azuma, H. (1984). Psychology in a non-Western country. International Journal of

Psychology, 19, 4556.
Bain, B. (1996). A primer on the Canadian Soul. World Psychology, 2, 437445.
Balan, J. (1983). Social sciences in the periphery: Perspectives on the Latin American case.
In L.D. Stifel, R.K. Davison, & J.S. Coleman (Eds.), Social sciences and public policy in the
developing world (pp.211247). Lexington, MA: D. C. Health.
Berry, J.W. (1974). Canadian psychology: Some social and applied emphases. Canadian
Psychologist, 15, 132139.
Berry, J.W. (1993). Psychology in and of Canada: One small step toward a universal
psychology. In U. Kim & J.W. Berry (Eds.), Indigenous psychologies: Research and
experience in cultural context (pp.260276). London: Sage.
Berry, J.W., Poortinga, Y.H., Segall, M.H., & Dasen, P.R. (1992). Cross-cultural psychology:
Research and applications. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Canadian Psychological Association. (1986). Canadian code of ethics for psychologists.
Ottawa, ON: CPA.
Choi, S.C., Kim, U., & Choi, S.H. (1993). Indigenous analysis of collective representation:
A Korean perspective. In U. Kim & J.W. Berry (Eds.), Indigenous psychologies: Research
and experience in cultural context (pp.193210). London: Sage.
D az-Guerrero, R. (1977). A Mexican psychology. American Psychologist, 32, 934944.
D az-Guerrero, R. (1993). Mexican ethnopsychology. In U. Kim & J.W. Berry (Eds.),
Indigenous psychologies: Research and experience in cultural context (pp.4455). London:
Sage.
Dobson, K., & Dobson, D. (1993). Professional psychology in Canada. Seattle: Hogrefe &
Huber.
Enriquez, V.G. (1993). Developing a Filipino psychology. In U. Kim & J.W. Berry (Eds.),
Indigenous psychologies: Research and experience in cultural context (pp.152169).
London: Sage.
Ho, D.Y.F. (1993). Relational orientation in Asian social psychology. In U. Kim & J.W.
Berry (Eds.), Indigenous psychologies: Research and experience in cultural context
(pp.240259). London: Sage.
Kim, U., & Berry, J.W. (Eds.). (1993). Indigenous psychologies: Research and experience in
cultural context. London: Sage.
Kim, U., Park, Y-S., & Park, D. (this issue). The Korean indigenous psychology approach:
Theoretical considerations and empirical applications. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 48, 451464.
Moghaddam, F.M. (1993). Traditional and modern psychologies in competing cultural
systems: Lessons from Iran 1978-1981. In U. Kim & J.W. Berry (Eds.), Indigenous
psychologies: Research and experience in cultural context (pp.240259). London: Sage.
Moghaddam, F.M., & Taylor, D.M. (1986). What constitutes an appropriate psychology for
the developing world? International Journal of Psychology, 21, 253267.
ngel, U
., & Smith, P.B. (this issue). The search for indigenous psychologies: Data from
O
Turkey and the former USSR. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 48, 465479.
Pande, N., & Naidu, R.K. (1992). Anasakti and health: A study of non-attachment.
Psychology and Developing Societies, 4, 89104.
Salazar, J.M., & Salazar, M.A. (1998). Permanence and modication in national identities.
In J.G. Adair, D. Belanger & K.L. Dion (Eds.), Advances in psychological science (Vol. 1,
pp.247270). Hove, UK: Psychology Press.
Sinha, D. (1986). Psychology in a Third World country: The Indian experience . New York:
Sage.
Sinha, D. (1988). Indigenisation of psychology in India and its relevance. The Indian Journal
of Social Science, 1, 7791.

418

ADAIR

Sinha, D. (1997). Indigenizing psychology. In J.W. Berry, Y. Poortinga, & J. Pandey (Eds.),
Handbook of cross-cultural psychology. Vol. 1: Theory and method (pp.129169). Boston:
Allyn & Bacon.
Sinha, D., & Holtzman, W. (1984). Psychology in the context of Third World development.
International Journal of Psychology, 19, 3192.
Sinha, J.B.P. (1984). Towards partnership for relevant research in the Third World
International Journal of Psychology, 19, 169178.
Sinha, J.B.P. (1993). The bulk and the front of psychology in India. Psychology and
Developing Societies, 5, 135150.
Ziman, J. (1971). Science in developing countries. Minerva, 9, 3237.