The American Psychological Association No Longer Represents Good Science or Clinical Practice: An…

Summary

Christopher J. Ferguson, Ph.D., resigns from the American Psychological Association (APA), citing concerns that the organization's public statements and policy guidelines are not scientifically grounded and may cause harm, particularly in the areas of video game violence, spanking, racial justice, and guidelines for men and boys.

Abstract

In an open letter dated December 26, 2021, Dr. Christopher J. Ferguson announces his resignation from the APA, effective upon the expiration of his current membership. He expresses a loss of confidence in the APA's commitment to scientific integrity and ethical clinical practice. Ferguson criticizes the APA for distorting evidence on violent video games, adopting ideological stances on spanking and racial justice, and issuing unscientific practice guidelines, particularly those concerning men and boys. He argues that these actions may lead to harm and discourage individuals from seeking necessary treatment. Ferguson also takes issue with the APA's handling of issues related to racism, suggesting that the organization's statements lack empirical basis and could be traumatizing. He concludes by asserting that the APA is more focused on political expediency than on its role as a scientific and clinical organization, and he aligns with critics who argue that current sociopolitical trends are detrimental to mental health.

Opinions

The APA has misrepresented research on violent video games, ignoring cautions from scholars.
The APA's policy statements on spanking and racism are overly ideological and not reflective of the nuanced nature of these issues.
Recent APA guidelines, such as those for men and boys, are not well-supported by scientific evidence and could be harmful to clients.
The APA's stance on racism, including the use of terms like "pandemic of racism," is seen as alarmist and not based on empirical data.
The APA is accused of failing to address cognitive distortions and confirmation bias in its discussions of racism.
Ferguson believes the APA is more concerned with political trends and organizational self-interest than with promoting psychological science and clinical practice.
He suggests that the APA's actions contribute to societal trends that exacerbate mental illness, such as catastrophizing and moral grandstanding.
Ferguson identifies as liberal but feels compelled to speak out against the APA's alignment with the sociopolitical left, which he believes is causing reputational damage to psychological science.

The American Psychological Association No Longer Represents Good Science or Clinical Practice: An Open Letter on My Resignation from the APA

December 26, 2021

Dear American Psychological Association:

It is with a heavy heart that I write to officially resign my membership in the American Psychological Association (APA) at this time effective when my current year’s membership expires. I do so because I increasingly feel the APA has lost its way as either a science organization or an organization representing good clinical practice. Increasingly, I am concerned that its public facing messages are more likely to do harm than good and, as such, I cannot in good ethical conscience continue my membership. I write this in the form of an open letter in hopes my comments may lead to some reflection as well as broader awareness regarding issues facing the APA today.

The problems facing the APA are nothing new. Within my own area of research, the APA has grossly distorted the evidence on “violent” video games for decades, despite repeated cautions from scholars (including, at one point, an open letter by over 200 scholars, as well as a statement of concern from the Society of Media Psychology and Technology). This extends to other public policy statements such as on spanking where the nuances of a complicated and controversial field are flattened into a definitive but ideological stance. Similarly, recent practice guidelines, most notably the guidelines for Men and Boys but also treatment for PTSD, are not well grounded in science and often conflict with scientific data. I worry specifically that these policy statements may do actual harm to clients, particularly that on Men and Boys which has credibly been accused of disparaging more traditional men, and may actually discourage many men and families from seeking treatment they could benefit from.

I am also concerned that the APA is failing in an important role in regard to issues related to racial justice. Specifically, the APA appears to be experiencing institutional capture in that it has made public statements about a “pandemic of racism” (arguably a cliché influenced by the Covid19 pandemic), without clarifying what this term means or how it is empirically evaluated. Racism is important for us to consider, and we must both recognize it in our history, and challenge it wherever it occurs.

However, adopting a dystopian and data-deficient view of the present is likely to do more harm than good. Informing people that they are always in imminent threat of fatal violence or other forms of serious harm can in itself be traumatizing. In fact, most psychological evidence points to historical declines in both explicit and implicit racism (though that last term is itself controversial). Acts like the horrific murders of George Floyd and Ahmaud Arbery remain rare in the US and have been declining. Police violence is a complex and nuanced issue and deserves to be considered as such, not with news-gratifying platitudes. Some evidence suggests class issues, rather than race, may predict negative outcomes. Psychologists are aware of how cognitive distortions such as the availability heuristic, cognitive dissonance, and confirmation bias, as well as the pressure to socially conform can misinform, yet the APA has failed to guide us in a cautious and data-based discussion of racism.

Ultimately, it is my perception informed in part by my own time on the Council of Representatives, but also watching the APA’s public facing communications that the APA does not function as either a science or clinical organization. Rather, it appears to sway with the political currents to what may be its optimal inward-focused gain at any given time. This appears to be as true regarding its historical involvement with the mistreatment of detainees as documented in the Hoffman Report as it is regarding its capitulation to “wokism” in the present.

Increasingly, I agree with Jonathan Haidt and Greg Lukianoff when they suggest society is encouraging people to behave in emotional and cognitive ways that are known to exacerbate mental illness, whether catastrophizing, generalizing, selective abstraction, personalizing, etc. We also give extreme power to outrage and moral grandstanding as well as inaccurate sources of information such as anecdotes and “lived experiences.” Unfortunately, my perception is that the APA is furthering this negative process, not attempting to correct it.

I understand that my words will be unwelcome to the APA and perhaps many others aligned with this current movement on the sociopolitical left (and note, I identify as liberal myself). However, I felt that to remain silent in the face of the potential damage the APA is doing to the reputation of psychological science, as well as to people of all backgrounds who rely on the APA to guide discussions of these important yet complicated issues obligated me to speak openly. I hope my words will be constructive in moving these dialogues forward.

Cordially,

Christopher J. Ferguson, Ph.D.