Search

Memorializes Robert A. Wicklund (1941-2020). Wicklund was born in Seattle, WA, December 1, 1941. At the time of his death on December 12, 2020, he maintained residences in Bainbridge Island, WA, and Bielefeld, Germany. Bob earned his undergraduate degree at the University of Washington and his doctorate at Duke University in 1968. He held primary faculty positions at the University of Texas at Austin, Universität Bielefeld, and the Università di Trieste, and secondary appointments at numerous institutions, including the Ruhr-Universität Bochum, University of Bergen, Universität Mannheim, and Università di Palermo. Bob was a scholar's scholar who dedicated his entire life to understanding psychological phenomena, and to sharing his ideas with others. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

Presents an obituary for Sharon Stephens Brehm (1945-2018). Brehm was president of the American Psychological Association in 2007. Her presidential address was titled "Looking Ahead: The Future of Psychology and APA" (see the July-August 2008 issue of American Psychologist, Vol. 63, pp. 337-344). In her presidential term, she worked to increase diversity, interdisciplinarity, and internationalization in psychology. Major initiatives included task forces on integrative health care, math and science education, and institutional review boards. Sharon was a writer of the first order. She published numerous books, chapters, and articles, including wellreceived social psychology textbooks prepared with Saul Kassin and Steven Fein. One book of special note was her foundational The Application of Social Psychology to Clinical Practice (1976), which played a key role in inspiring interest in the social-clinical interface. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).

Rex A. Wright and Sharon S. BrehmUniversity of KansasRecent attempts to reinterpret reactance theory in terms of impression man-agement are considered in light of available empirical evidence. Contrary to whatan impression management view would predict, reactance effects have been ob-served (a) where there was only a tenuous "glimpse" of a social agent, (b) wherefreedom threat or elimination occurred by chance or was not intentional, (c)where subjects' responses were not observable by either the influencing agent ora relevant observer (someone who has witnessed the threat), and (d) wheresubjects' responses could not be individually identified. Also inconsistent withthe impression management formulation of reactance is evidence that neither aninfluencing agent nor a relevant observer must be present for freedom restorationby a third party to be effective. It is concluded that although self-presentationmight account for some reactance effects, the theory as a whole cannot be sub-sumed.Reactance theory (Brehm, 1966; Brehm& Brehm, 1981, Wicklund, 1974) was for-mulated to explain individuals' reactions tosituations in which perceived behavioralfreedoms are eliminated or threatened withelimination. It is theorized that in such sit-uations motivation is aroused to restore and/or confirm those freedoms in question, re-sulting in enhanced attraction to and in-creased tendency to perform relevant be-haviors.Recently, a serious and provocative chal-lenge has been posed in regard to the mech-anism involved in reactance effects. Thoughthe exact form of the argument varies, thequestion raised is whether individuals aremotivated to preserve freedoms per se as re-actance theory postulates or, instead, onlyto project an image of autonomy to others(Baer, Hinkle, Smith, & Fenton, 1980; Heil-man & Toffler, 1976; Schlenker, 1980). Inthis article we would like to evaluate thisreinterpretation of reactance theory asimpression management in light of availableempirical evidence.The impression management view is statedin its clearest form by Heilman and Toffler(1976). These writers propose that negative