Traditionally, the idea of "organization" of the theory group has been
opposed on ideological grounds ("organizations foster politicking, but PCP
is about ideas, etc.). And yet, we have developed more or less successful
groups with their own newsletters, meetings, dues, etc. in Europe, North
America, and the Australasian region. While this regional approach has
some clear drawbacks (e.g., my Latin American collegues interested in PCP
have no idea where to turn), it has largely succeeded in fostering greater
conceptual, methodological, and applied exchanges in the regions best
represented. Given the satisfactory experiment of organizing on this
level, what unique factors lead us away from creating something more
cohesive and organized internationally (i.e., that embraces all regions)?
I'm not going to carry this banner into future conferences, but I thought
that this electronic network might provide a forum for thinking through
this issues, in the wake of Joern's query about future meeting sites. What
problems and prospects do you envision in developing ways to link the
initiatives of existing regional groups, and maybe facilitate the inclusion
of those outside of the most "constructivized" regions?
Robert A. Neimeyer, Ph.D.
Department of Psychology
University of Memphis
Memphis, TN 38152
(901) 678-4680
FAX (901) 678-2579
neimeyerra@MSUVX1.MEMPHIS.EDU
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%