Humanitarian Work Psychology: Concepts to Contributions

Author(s):  
Stuart C. Carr ◽  
Foster Thompson ◽  
Walter Reichman ◽  
Ishbel McWha ◽  
Leo Marai ◽  
...  
2016 ◽  
Vol 26 (5) ◽  
pp. 481-484 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tinashe Timothy Harry ◽  
Nicole Dodd

2012 ◽  
pp. 3-33 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stuart C. Carr ◽  
Judith M. De Guzman ◽  
Shahla M. Eltyeb ◽  
Adrian Furnham ◽  
Malcolm MacLachlan ◽  
...  

2011 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lori Foster Thompson ◽  
Stuart C. Carr ◽  
Leo Marai ◽  
Mary O. Berry ◽  
Walter Reichman ◽  
...  

2017 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 370-376
Author(s):  
Julie B. Olson-Buchanan ◽  
Tammy D. Allen

Gloss, Carr, Reichman, Abdul-Nasiru, and Oestereich (2017) present a compelling argument (or rallying call) for there being a “moral imperative for I-O psychology to overrepresent people living in the deepest forms of poverty in both science and practice” (p. 330). We agree. Our research has been dominated by a POSH perspective, and it is incumbent upon us to ensure that our science benefits those who are most affected by poverty. We believe the interest in engaging in humanitarian work psychology is growing among industrial and organizational (I-O) psychologists, yet many of us may not feel prepared to conduct such research and/or we may feel that we lack the skills to do so. Further, as Gloss et al. (2017) note, to the extent that we are unprepared to engage in research that benefits those living in poverty, in particular, we run the added risk of harming the very populations we are wanting to help. As such, the interest is there, but we may be daunted by the method. We argue that in order to heed that rallying call, without harm, we need to develop our own capabilities to engage in this important work.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document