Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-lnqnp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T15:35:56.834Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

References

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 June 2021

Fathali M. Moghaddam
Fathali M. Moghaddam
Affiliation:
Georgetown University, Washington DC
Get access

Summary

A summary is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Chapter
Information
Shakespeare and the Experimental Psychologist , pp. 205 - 216
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2021

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Adorno, T. W., Frenkel-Brunswik, E., Levinson, D. J., & Sanford, B. W. (1950). The authoritarian personality. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
Ahlburg, D. A. (ed.) (2019). The changing face of higher education: Is there an international crisis in the humanities? New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Ainsworth, M. D. S., Blehar, M. C., Waters, E., & Wall, S. N. (2015). Patterns of attachment: A psychological study of the strange situation. New York: Psychology Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alduy, C., & Greene, R. (2010). Between experience and experiment: Five articles on an early modern crossroad. Republic of Letters: A Journal for the Study of Knowledge, Politics, and the Arts, 1. https://stanford.io/3oADsFM (last accessed September 4, 2020).Google Scholar
Aronson, E., & Carlsmith, J. M. (1968). Experimentation in social psychology. In Lindzey, G. & Aronson, E. (eds.), The handbook of social psychology (vol. 2, pp. 1–79). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
Austen, J. (1997). Sense and sensibility. New York: Signet Classics. (Original work published 1811)Google Scholar
Austin, J. L. (1961). Philosophical paper. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Bandura, A. (1973). Aggression: A social learning analysis. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
Benson, C. (2001). The cultural psychology of self: Place, morality and art in human worlds. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Biberman, M. (2017). Shakespeare, adaptation, psychoanalysis: Better than new. Oxon: Routledge.Google Scholar
Bijsterveld, K., & Peters, P. F. (2013). Composing claims on music instrument development: A science and technology studies’ contribution. Interdisciplinary Science Reviews, 35, 106–121.Google Scholar
Bizumic, B., & Duckitt, J. (2018). Investigating right-wing authoritarianism with a very short authoritarianism scale. Journal of Social and Political Psychology, 6, 129–150.Google Scholar
Blader, S. L., Shirako, A., & Chen, Y. R. (2016). Looking out from the top: Differential effects of status and power on perspective taking. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 42, 723–737.Google Scholar
Bloom, H. (1998). The invention of the human. New York: Riverhead Books.Google Scholar
Brock, A. C., Louw, J., & Van Hoorn, W. (2004). Rediscovering the history of psychology: Essays inspired by the work of Kurt Danziger. New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers.Google Scholar
Brown, J. R. (2011). The laboratory of the mind: Thought experiments in the natural sciences. London: Routledge. 2nd ed.Google Scholar
Budra, P., & Werier, C. (eds.) (2016). Shakespeare and consciousness. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Burger, J. M. (2009). Replicating Milgram: Would people still obey today? American Psychologist, 64, 1–11.Google Scholar
Bushnell, N. S. (1932). Natural supernaturalism in The Tempest. PMLA, 47, 684–698.Google Scholar
Buzzoni, M. (2008). Thought experiments in the natural sciences. Würzburg: Königshausen & Neumann.Google Scholar
Bryon, E., Bishop, J. M., McLaughlin, D., & Kaufman, J. (eds.) (2018). Embodied cognition, acting and performance. New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Camp, E. (2009). Two varieties of literary imagination: Metaphor, fiction, and thought experiments. Midwest Studies in Philosophy, 33, 107–130.Google Scholar
Carlson, D. (2015). “Tis new to thee”: Power, magic, and early science in Shakespeare’s The Tempest. The Ben Jonson Journal, 22, 1–22.Google Scholar
Carlson, M. (1993). Theories of theater: A historical and critical survey, from the Greeks to the present. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Carlson, N. R., Heth, C. D., Miller, H., Donahoe, J. W., Buskist, W., & Martin, G. N.(2007). Psychology: The science of behavior. Boston: Pearson Education. 6th ed.Google Scholar
Castelvecchi, D. (2018). Reimagining of Schrödinger’s cat breaks quantum mechanics – and stumps physicists. Nature, 561, 446–447.Google Scholar
Chanan, G. (2015). Shakespeare and democracy: The self-renewing politics of a global playwright. Kibworth, Leicester, UK: Troubador Publishing.Google Scholar
Chin, K., Atkinson, B. E., Raheb, H., Harris, E., & Vernon, P. A. (2017). The dark side of romantic jealousy. Personality and Individual Differences, 115, 23–29.Google Scholar
Christie, R., & Geis, F. L. (1970). Studies in Machiavellianism. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Clark, C. (1936). Shakespeare and psychology. London: Williams and Norgate. Reprinted in 1977 by Haskell House (Brooklyn, N.Y.).Google Scholar
Coelho, T. (2019). Fado – The soul of Portuguese music. Portugal.com. Available at: https://bit.ly/3qJDD3B (last accessed January 10, 2020, 1:21am EST).Google Scholar
Coetzee, J. M., & Kurtz, A. (2015). The good story: Exchanges on truth, fiction and psychotherapy. New York: Penguin.Google Scholar
Cohen, A. M. (2006). Shakespeare and technology: Dramatizing early modern technological revolutions. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Cohen, H. F. (1984). Quantifying music: The science of music at the first stage of the scientific revolution, 1580–1650. Boston, MA: D. Reidel Publishing Co.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cusack, G. (2002). “The gripe of the ditch”: Nationalism, famine, and The Playboy of the Western World. Modern Drama, 45, 567–592.Google Scholar
Danziger, K. (1990). Constructing the subject: Historical origins of psychological research. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Darley, J. M., and Latané, B. (1968). Bystander intervention in emergencies: Diffusion of responsibility. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 8, 377–383.Google Scholar
Dawkins, R. (1986). The blind watchmaker: Why the evidence of evolution reveals a universe without design. New York: W.W. Norton.Google Scholar
DeClercq, D., Haq, I. U., & Azeem, M. U. (2017). Perceived threats of terrorism and job performance: The role of job-related anxiety and religiousness. Journal of Business Research, 78, 23–32.Google Scholar
Delahaij, R., & Van Dam, K., (2017). Coping with acute stress in the military: The influence of coping style, coping self-efficacy and appraisal emotions. Personality and Individual Differences, 119, 13–18.Google Scholar
Diamond, J. (2016). Trump: I could ‘shoot somebody and I wouldn’t lose voters’. CNN, https://cnn.it/33WEHHv (last accessed 9 December 2020).Google Scholar
Di Biase, C. G. (2001). “I am as I have spoken”: The act of naming in “Macbeth.” Renaissance and Reformation/Renaissance et Réforme, 25, 23–44.Google Scholar
Donaldson, S. I., Dollwet, M., & Rao, M. A. (2015). Happiness, excellence, and optimal human functioning revisited: Examining the peer-reviewed literature linked to positive psychology. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 3, 185–195.Google Scholar
Dubois, D., Rucker, D. D., and Galinsky, A. D. (2015). Social class, power, and selfishness: When and why upper and lower class individuals behave unethically. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 108, 436–449.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Duncan, S. (2018). Shakespeare’s props: Memory and cognition. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Dunstan, R., & Moghaddam, F. M. (2016). Causation in introductory psychology texts. In Harré, R. & Moghaddam, F. M. (eds.), Questioning causality: Scientific explorations of cause and consequence. Across social contexts (pp. 53–64). Santa Barbara, CA: Praeger.Google Scholar
Dupont, C., Armant, R. D., & Brenner, C. A. (2009). Epigenetics: Definition, mechanisms and clinical perspective. Seminars in Reproductive Medicine, 27, 351–357.Google Scholar
Elgin, C. Z. (2014). Fiction as thought experiment. Perspectives on Science, 22, 221–241.Google Scholar
Elliot, R. (2016). Fado and the place of longing: Loss, memory and the city. London: Routledge. First published 2010.Google Scholar
Erlich, B. (1977). Shakespeare’s colonial metaphor: On the social function of theatre in “The Tempest.” Science & Society, 41, 43–65.Google Scholar
Evreinov, N. (1927). The theater in life (Trans. Nakaroff, A. J.). New York: Bretano.Google Scholar
Falk, D. (2014). The science of Shakespeare: A new look at the playwright’s universe. New York: Thomas Donne Books.Google Scholar
Fast, N. J., Sivanathan, N., Meyer, N. D., & Galinsky, A. D. (2012). Power and over-confident decision-making. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 117, 249–260.Google Scholar
Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Finkel, N., & Moghaddam, F. M. (eds.) (2005). The psychology of rights and duties: Empirical contributions and normative commentaries. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fiske, S. T., & Markus, H. (eds.) (2012). Facing social class: How societal rank influences interaction. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
Fletcher, A. (2007). Time, space, and motion in the age of Shakespeare. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Ford, K. W. (2016). Basic physics: A resource for physics teachers. Hackensack, NJ: World Scientific Publishing.Google Scholar
Francis, G. (2012). The psychology of replication and replication in psychology. Psychological Science, 7, 585–594.Google ScholarPubMed
Frappier, M., Meynell, L., & Brown, J. R. (eds.) (2013). Thought experiments in science, philosophy, and the arts. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Frauchiger, D., & Renner, R. (2018). Quantum theory cannot consistently describe the use of itself. Nature Communication, 9, 1–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Friedman, M., & Rosenman, R. H. (1959). Association of specific overt behavior pattern with blood cardiovascular findings: Blood cholesterol, blood clotting time, incidence of arcus senilis, and clinical coronary artery disease. Journal of the American Medical Association, 169, 1286–1296.Google Scholar
Funder, D. C. (2019). The personality puzzle. New York: W.W. Norton. 8th ed.Google Scholar
Gable, S. L., & Haidt, J. (2005). What (and why) is positive psychology? Review of General Psychology, 9, 103–110.Google Scholar
Galinsky, A. D., Magee, J. C., Ena Inesi, M., & Gruenfeld, D. H. (2006). Power and perspectives not taken. Psychological Science, 17, 1068–1074.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Galinsky, A. D., Magee, J. C., Rus, D., Rothman, N. B., & Todd, A. R. (2014). Accelerating with steering: The synergistic benefits of combining power and perspective taking. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 5, 627–635.Google Scholar
Gavrilets, S., & Vose, E. (2006). The dynamics of Machiavellian intelligence. PNAS: Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 103, 16823–16828.Google Scholar
Gendler, T. S. (1998). Galileo and the indispensability of scientific thought experiment. British Journal of Philosophy of Science, 49, 397–424.Google Scholar
Gendler, T. S. (2000). Thought experiment: On the powers and limits of imaginary cases. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Gill, D. (2017). Melancholic modalities: Affect, Islam, and Turkish classical musicians. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goffman, E. (1959). The presentation of the self in everyday life. Garden City, NY: Doubleday/Anchor.Google Scholar
Goffman, E. (2005). Interaction ritual. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers. First published 1967.Google Scholar
Goldinger, S. D., Papesh, M. H., Barnhart, A. S., Hansen, W. A., & Hout, M. C. (2016) The poverty of embodied cognition. Psychonomic Bulletin &. Review, 23, 959–978.Google Scholar
Graham, M. J., Djorgovski, S. G., Stern, D., Glikman, E., Drake, A. J., et al., (2015). A possible close supermassive black-hole binary in a quasar with optical periodicity. Nature, 518, 74–76.Google Scholar
Greenblatt, S. (2004). Will in the world: How Shakespeare became Shakespeare. New York: W.W. Norton.Google Scholar
Greenblatt, S. (2018). Tyrant: Shakespeare on politics. New York: W. W. Norton & Company.Google Scholar
Groves, J. E. (2018). Hamlet on the couch: What Shakespeare taught Freud. Abingdon, Oxon; New York, NY:Routledge.Google Scholar
Hadfield, A. (2005). Shakespeare and republicanism. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Háfez (1995). The green sea of heaven: Fifty ghazals from the Díwán of Háfez (Trans. Gray, E. T.). Ashland, OR: White Cloud Press.Google Scholar
Handel, S. (2019). Perceptual organization: An integrated multisensory approach. Cham, Switzerland: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Harkness, D. E. (2008). The jewel house: Elizabethan London and the scientific revolution. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Harley, J. M. (2015). Measuring emotions: A survey of cutting-edge methodologies used in computer-based learning environment research. In Tettegah, S. & Gartmeier, M. (eds.), Emotions, technology, design, and learning (pp. 89–114). London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Harré, R. (1981). Great scientific experiments: Twenty experiments that changed our view of the world. Oxford: Phaidon Press.Google Scholar
Harré, R. (1987). Varieties of realism: A rationale for the natural sciences. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Harré, R. (1998). The singular self: An introduction to the psychology of personhood. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Harré, R. (2009). Pavlov’s dogs and Schrödinger’s cat: Scenes from the living laboratory. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harré, R. (2012). Emotions. In Harré, R. & Moghaddam, F. M. (eds.), Psychology for the third millennium: Integrating cultural and neuroscience perspectives (pp. 182–202). London & Thousand Oaks, CA.: Sage.Google Scholar
Harré, R., & Moghaddam, F. M. (eds.) (2003). The self and others: Positioning individuals and groups in personal, organizational, political, and cultural contexts. Westport, CT: Praeger.Google Scholar
Harré, R., & Moghaddam, F. M. (eds.) (2012). Psychology for the third millennium: Integrating cultural and neuroscience perspectives. London & Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Harré, R., & Moghaddam, F. M. (2016) (eds.) Questioning causality: Scientific explorations of cause and consequence across social contexts. Santa Barbara, CA: Praeger.Google Scholar
Harré, R., Moghaddam, F. M., Pilkerton-Cairnie, T., Rothbart, D., & Sabat, S. (2009). Recent advances in positioning theory. Theory & Psychology, 19, 5–31.Google Scholar
Hendricks, M. J., & Moghaddam, F. M. (2020). Psychology for the global 99%. In Sundararajan, L., Hwang, K. K., & Yeh, K. H. (eds.), Global psychology from indigenous perspectives: Visions inspired by K. S. Yang (pp. 145–157). Cham, Switzerland: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Hett, B. C. (2015). “This story is about something fundamental”: Nazi criminals, history, memory, and the Reichstag Fire. Central European History, 48, 199–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hodgson, E. (2016). Forgetting Cleopatra. In Budra, P. & Werier, C. (eds.), Shakespeare and consciousness (pp. 267–292). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holderness, G. (2011). Nine lives of William Shakespeare. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
Holderness, G. (2014). Shakespeare and perception. Critical Survey, 26, 92–108.Google Scholar
Holland, N. N. (1966). Psychoanalysis and Shakespeare. New York: McGraw Hill.Google Scholar
Holt, J. C. (1992). Magna Carta. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press. 2nd ed.Google Scholar
Horowitz, T., & Massey, G. (eds.) (1991). Thought experiments in science and philosophy. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.Google Scholar
Huff, T. E. (2005). An age of science and revolutions, 1600–1800. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Johnson, L., & Sutton, J. (eds.) (2014). Embodied cognition and Shakespeare’s theatre: The early body-mind. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Jones, D. (2014). The War of the Roses: The fall of the Plantagenets and the rise of the Tudors. New York: Penguin.Google Scholar
Jones, E. (1976). Hamlet and Oedipus. New York: W.W. Norton. First published 1949.Google Scholar
Joseph, J. M., Kane, T. R., Nacci, P. L., & Tedechi, J. T. (2010). Perceived aggression: A re-evaluation of the Bandura modeling paradigm. The Journal of Social Psychology, 103, 277–289.Google Scholar
Jun, N. (2014). Principles of physics: From quantum field theory to classical mechanics. Hackensack, NJ: World Scientific Publishing.Google Scholar
Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking fast and slow. New York: Farrar, Strauss and Giroux.Google Scholar
Kalat, J. W. (2017). Introduction to psychology. Boston: Cengage Learning. 11th ed.Google Scholar
Kaufman, J. C., & Sternberg, R. J. (eds.) (2010). The Cambridge handbook of creativity. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Keller, J. G. (2005). The moral thinking of Macbeth. Philosophy and Literature, 29, 41–56.Google Scholar
Kemp, R. (2012). Embodies acting: What neuroscience tells us about performance. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Kilduff, G. J., Galinsky, A. D., Gallo, E., & Reade, J. J. (2016). Whatever it takes: Rivalry and unethical behavior. Academy of Management Journal, 59, 1508–1534.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kim, J., Shin, Y., & Lee, S. (2017). Built on stone or sand: The stable powerful are unethical, the unstable powerful are not. Journal of Business Ethics, 144, 437–447.Google Scholar
Kim, M. G. (2001). The analytic ideal of chemical elements: Robert Boyle and the French didactic tradition of chemistry. Science in Context, 14, 361–395.Google Scholar
Kind, A., & Kung, P. (eds.) (2016). Knowledge through imagination. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Kirshner, R. P. (2016). The extravagant universe: Exploding stars, dark energy, and the accelerating cosmos. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kirwood, A. E. M. (1931). Richard Field, printer, 1589–1624. The Library, XII, 1–39.Google Scholar
Knight, R. D. (2016). Physics for scientists and engineers. Boston: Pearson. 4th ed.Google Scholar
Knobe, J., & Shapiro, S. J. (Forthcoming) Proximate cause explained: An essay in Experimental Jurisprudence. University of Chicago Law Review. Available at: SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3544982 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3544982.Google Scholar
Kohlberg, L. (1976). Moral stages and moralization: The cognitive-developmental approach. In Lickona, T. (ed.), Moral development and behavior (pp. 31–53). New York: Holt.Google Scholar
Kominsky, J. F., Phillips, J., Gerstenberg, T., Lagnado, D., & Knobe, J. (2015). Causal superseding. Cognition, 137, 196–209.Google Scholar
Kozulin, A. (1998). Psychological tools: A sociocultural approach to education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Krims, M. B. (2006). The mind according to Shakespeare: Psychoanalysis in the Bard’s writing. Westport, CT: Praeger.Google Scholar
Kuhn, T. S. (1981). A function for thought experiments. In Hacking, I. (ed.), Scientific revolutions (pp. 6–27). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Kuligowski, E. (2013). Predicting human behavior during fires. Fire Technology, 49, 101–120.Google Scholar
Lamiell, J. T. (2003). Beyond individual and group differences: Human individuality, scientific psychology, and William Stern’s critical personalism. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Lammers, J., Galinsky, A. D., Dubois, D., & Rucker, R. D. (2015). Power and morality. Current Opinion in Psychology, 6, 15–19.Google Scholar
Lammers, J., Galinsky, A. D., Gordijn, E. H., & Otten, S. (2008). Illegitimacy moderates the effects of power on approach. Psychological Science, 19, 558–564.Google Scholar
Lammers, J., Gordijn, E. H., & Otten, S. (2008). Looking through the eyes of the powerful. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 44, 1229–1238.Google Scholar
Lammers, J., Stapel, D. A., & Galinsky, A. D. (2010). Power increases hypocrisy: Moralizing in reasoning, immorality in behavior. Psychological Science, 21, 737–744.Google Scholar
Langis, U. (2012). Shakespeare and prudential psychology: Ambition and akrasia in Macbeth. Shakespeare Studies, 40, 44–52.Google Scholar
Lennox, J. G. (1991). Darwinian thought experiments: A function of just-so stories. In Horowitz, T. & Massey, G. (eds.), Thought experiments in science and philosophy (pp. 223–245) Savage, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.Google Scholar
Levine, G. (1987). One culture: Science and literature. In Levine, G. (ed.), One culture: Essays in science and literature (pp. 3–32). Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar
Lindstrom, S. (2015). Creative writing: From think to ink. Amazon Digital Services.Google Scholar
Loomba, A. (2002). Shakespeare, race, and colonialism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Love, G. A. (2010). Shakespeare’s origin of species and Darwin’s Tempest. Configurations, 18, 121–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lucretius (1998). On the nature of the universe. (Trans. Melville, R.). Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
McGuire, R. L. (1967). The play-within-the-play in 1 Henry IV. Shakespeare Quarterly, 18, 47–52.Google Scholar
McHugh, L., & Stewart, I. (eds.) (2012). Perspective taking: Contributions and applications from modern behavioral science. Oakland, CA: New Harbinger Publications.Google Scholar
McMullen, E. T. (1995). Anatomy of a physiological discovery: William Harvey and the circulation of blood. Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine, 88, 491–498.Google Scholar
Mesquita, B., Boiger, M., & De Leersnyder, J. (2016). The cultural construction of emotions. Current Opinions in Psychology, 8, 31–36.Google Scholar
Milgram, S. (1974). Obedience to authority: An experimental view. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
Mills, M. (2018). Psychoanalytic ideas and Shakespeare. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Moghaddam, F. M. (1987). Psychology in the Three Worlds: As reflected by the ‘crisis’ in social psychology and the move towards indigenous Third World psychology. American Psychologist, 47, 912–920.Google Scholar
Moghaddam, F. M. (1997). The specialized society: The plight of the individual in an age of individualism. Westport, CT: Praeger.Google Scholar
Moghaddam, F. M. (1998). Social psychology: Exploring universals across cultures. New York: Freeman.Google Scholar
Moghaddam, F. M. (2000). Toward a cultural theory of human rights. Theory & Psychology, 10, 291–312.Google Scholar
Moghaddam, F. M. (2004). From ‘psychology in literature’ to ‘psychology is literature’: An exploration of boundaries and relationships. Theory & Psychology, 14, 505–525.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moghaddam, F. M. (2005). Great ideas in psychology. Oxford: Oneworld.Google Scholar
Moghaddam, F. M. (2006) From the terrorists’ point of view: What they experience and why they come to destroy. Westport, CT: Praeger Security International Series.Google Scholar
Moghaddam, F. M. (2013). The psychology of dictatorship. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association Press.Google Scholar
Moghaddam, F. M. (2016). The psychology of democracy. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association Press.Google Scholar
Moghaddam, F. M. (2018). Mutual radicalization: How groups and nations push each other to extremes. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association Press.Google Scholar
Moghaddam, F. M. (2019). Threat to democracy: The appeal of authoritarianism in an age of uncertainty. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association Press.Google Scholar
Moghaddam, F. M., & Covalucci, L. (2016). Macro, meso, micro creativity: The role of cultural carriers. In Glaveneau, V. P. (ed.), The handbook of creativity and culture (pp. 721–741). London: Palgrave.Google Scholar
Moghaddam, F. M., & Harré, R. (1992). Rethinking the laboratory experiment. American Behavioral Scientist, 36, 22–38.Google Scholar
Moghaddam, F. M., Slocum, N. R., Finkel, N., Mor, T., & Harré, R. (2000). Toward a cultural theory of duties. Culture & Psychology, 6, 275–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moghaddam, F. M., & Vuksanovic, V. (1990). Attitudes and behavior toward human rights across different contexts: The role of right-wing authoritarianism, political ideology, and religiosity. International Journal of Psychology, 25, 455–474.Google Scholar
Moore, D. S. (2003). The dependent gene: The fallacy of “nature vs. nurture.”New York: Henry Holt.Google Scholar
Mowat, B. A. (1981). Prospero and the Renaissance scientist. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 1981, 77–84.Google Scholar
Mowat, B. A. (2001). Prospero’s book. Shakespeare Quarterly, 52, 1–33.Google Scholar
Muñoz Simonds, P. (1997–1998). “My charms crack not”: The alchemical structure of The Tempest. Comparative Drama, 31, 538–570.Google Scholar
Murphy, P. M. (ed.) (2001). The Tempest: Critical essays. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Noble, D. (2006). The music of life: Biology beyond genes. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Norton, J. D. (1991). Thought experiments in Einstein’s work. In Horowitz, T. & Massey, G. (eds.), Thought experiments in science and philosophy (pp. 129–144). Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
Olson, R. (2015). “Too gentle”: Jealousy and class in Othello. Journal for Early Modern Cultural Studies, 15, 3–25.Google Scholar
Open Science Collaboration (2015). Estimating of reproducibility of psychological science. Science, 349, 943–950Google Scholar
Osbeck, L., Moghaddam, F. M., & Perreault, S. (1977). Similarity and attraction among majority and minority groups in a multicultural context. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 21, 113–123.Google Scholar
Oshio, A., Taku, K., Hirani, M., & Saeed, G. (2018). Resilience and big five personality traits: A meta-analysis. Personality and dividual Differences, 127, 54–60.Google Scholar
Özbag, G. K. (2016). The role of personality in leadership: Five factor personality traits and ethical leadership. Procedia: Social and Behavioral Sciences, 235, 235–242.Google Scholar
Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1986). Communication and persuasion: Central and peripheral routes to attitude change. New York: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
Piff, P. K., Stancato, D. M., Côté, S., Mendoza-Denton, R., & Keltner, D. (2012). Higher social class predicts increased unethical behavior. PNAS Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 109, 4086–4091.Google Scholar
Popper, K. (1963). Conjectures and refutations: The growth of scientific knowledge. Oxford: Routledge.Google Scholar
Post, J. M. (2013). Psychobiography: “The child is father of the man.” In Huddy, L., Sears, D. O., & Levy, J. S., The Oxford handbook of Political Psychology (pp. 459–488). New York: Oxford. 2nd ed.Google Scholar
Radden, J. (2003). Is this dame melancholy? Equating today’s depression and past melancholy. Philosophy, Psychiatry & Psychology, 10, 37–52.Google Scholar
Radden, J. (2018). Melancholy as disease: Learning about depression as disease from Burton’s Anatomy of Melancholy. Philosophy, Psychiatry & Psychology, 25, 225–234.Google Scholar
Ravasio, P., Guttormsen-Schär, S., & Tscherter, V. (2004). The qualitative experiment in HCI: Definition, occurrences, value and use. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interactions, 5, 1–24.Google Scholar
Raven, B. H., & French, J. (1959). The bases of social power. In Cartwright, D. (ed.), Studies in social power (pp. 150–167). Ann Arbor, MI: Institute for Social Research.Google Scholar
Richmond, H. M. (2018). Shakespeare relocated: Studies in historical psychology. New York: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Robinson, D. (1996). Wild beasts and idle humors: The insanity defense from antiquity to the present. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Rucker, D. D., & Galinsky, A. D. (2017). Social power and social class: Conceptualization, consequences, and current challenges. Current Opinion in Psychology, 18, 26–30.Google Scholar
Salmon, E. (1916). Shakespeare and democracy. London: Westminster Press.Google Scholar
Sanderson, C. A. (2019). The positive shift: Mastering mindset to improve happiness, health, and longevity. Grand Haven, MI: Brilliance Publishing, Inc.Google Scholar
Sawaoka, T., Hughes, B. L., & Ambady, N. (2015). Power heightens sensitivity to unfairness against the self. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 41, 1023–1035.Google Scholar
Sawday, J. (2007). Engines of the imagination: Renaissance culture and the rise of the. machine. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Schatzberg, E. (2012). From art to applied science. Isis, 103, 537–545.Google Scholar
Schimel, J. (2011). Writing science: How to write papers that get cited and proposals that get funded. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Schlaepfer, G., & Weber, M. (2018). Thought experiments in biology. In Stuart, M. T., Fehige, Y., & Brown, J. R. (eds.), The Routledge companion to thought experiments (pp. 243–256). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Schneider, S. (ed.) (2015). Science fiction and philosophy: From time travel to superintelligence. Oxford: Wiley Blackwell. 2nd ed.Google Scholar
Seligman, M. E. P. (2019). Positive psychology: A personal history. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 15, 1–23.Google Scholar
Shafir, E. (2017). Decisions in poverty contexts. Current Opinion in Psychology, 18, 131–136.Google Scholar
Shapiro, L. (2019). Embodied cognition. Oxford: Routledge. 2nd ed.Google Scholar
Sheldon, W. H., & Stevens, S. S. (1942). The varieties of temperament: A psychology of constitutional differences. Oxford: Harper.Google Scholar
Simonton, D. K. (2004). Creativity in science: Chance, logic, genius, and zeitgeist. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Singh, T., & Pande, N. (2017). Empirical investigation of visual imagery: An overview. International Journal of Social Sciences, 5, 541–546.Google Scholar
Skinner, B. F. (1948). Walden two. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Skinner, B. F. (1971). Beyond freedom and dignity. Harmondsworth: Penguin.Google Scholar
Skura, M. A. (1989). Discourse and the individual: The case of colonialism in “The Tempest.” Shakespeare Quarterly, 40, 42–69.Google Scholar
Smith, I. B. (1993). The impact of Stephen Hales on medicine. Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine, 86, 349–352.Google Scholar
Snow, C. P. (2018). The two cultures and the scientific revolution. La Vergne, Tennessee: BN Publishing.Google Scholar
Sokol, B. J. (ed.) (1993). The undiscover’d country: New essays on psychoanalysis and Shakespeare. London: Free Association Book.Google Scholar
Sokol, B. J. (2003). A brave new world of knowledge: Shakespeare’s The Tempest and early modern epistemology. London: Associated University Presses.Google Scholar
Solga, K. (ed.) (2020). Theater and performance in the neoliberal university: Responses to an academy in crisis. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Sorensen, R. (1992). Thought experiments. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Spiller, E. (2004). Science, reading and Renaissance literature: The art of making knowledge, 1580–1670. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Spiller, E. (2009). Shakespeare and the making of early modern science: Resituating Prospero’s art. South Central Review, 26, 24–41.Google Scholar
Stern, A. (1925). Psychoanalysis and literature. Psychoanalytic Review, 12, 460–464.Google Scholar
Sternberg, R. J. (2015). Successful intelligence: A model for testing intelligence beyond IQ tests. European Journal of Education and Psychology, 8, 76–84.Google Scholar
Sternberg, R. J. (2020). Perspectives on hate: How it originates, develops, manifests, and spreads. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
Stewart, M. C., & Wilson, B. G. (2016). The dynamic role of social media during Hurricane #Sandy: An introduction of the STREMII model to weather the storm of the crisis lifecycle. Computers in Human Behavior, 54, 639–646.Google Scholar
Stoppard, T. (2015). The hard problem. London: Faber and Faber.Google Scholar
Stuart, M. T. (2016). Taming theory with thought experiments: Understanding and scientific progress. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, Part A, 58, 24–33.Google Scholar
Stuart, M. T., Fehige, Y., & Brown, J. B. (eds.) (2018), The Routledge companion to thought experiments. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Tetlock, P. E., & Belkin, A. (eds.) (1996). Counterfactual thought experiments in world politics. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Tribble, E. (2011). Cognition in the Globe: Attention and memory in Shakespeare’s theatre. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Tribble, E., & Sutton, J. (2011). Cognitive ecology as a framework for Shakespearean studies. Shakespeare Studies, 39, 94–103.Google Scholar
Usher, P. D. (2010). Shakespeare and the dawn of modern science. Amherst, NY: Cambria Press.Google Scholar
Vickers, B. (ed.) (1987). English science, Bacon to Newton. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Vygotsky, L. S. (1962). Thought and language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Wallace, W. A. (1959). The scientific methodology of Theodoric of Freiberg: A case study of the relationship between science and philosophy. Fribourg, Switzerland: The University Press.Google Scholar
Walton, K. (1993). Mimesis as make-believe: On the foundations of the representational arts. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Weinberger, A. B., Gallagher, N. M., Warren, Z. J., English, G. A., Moghaddam, F. M., & Green, A. E. (2020). Implicit pattern learning predicts individual differences in belief in God in the United States and in Afghanistan. Nature Communications, 11.Google Scholar
Wellman, N., Mayer, D. M., Ong, M., & De Rue, D. S. (2016). When are do-gooders treated badly? Legitimate power, role expectations, and reactions to moral objections in organizations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 101, 793–814.Google Scholar
Wilson, E. O. (1999). Consilience: The unity of knowledge. New York: Vintage.Google Scholar
Winston, A. S., & Blais, D. J. (1996). What. counts as an experiment?: A transdisciplinary analysis of textbooks, 1930–1970. The American Journal of Psychology, 109, 599–617.Google Scholar
Winter, D. G. (2013). Personality profiles of political elites. In Huddy, L., Sears, D. O., & Levy, J. S., The Oxford handbook of political psychology (pp. 423–458). New York: Oxford. 2nd ed.Google Scholar
Woodman, R. W., Sawyer, J. E., & Griffin, R. W. (1993). Toward a theory of organizational creativity. Academy of Management Review, 18, 293–321.Google Scholar
Wootton, D. (2010). Galileo: Watcher of the skies. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Yakushko, O. (2018). Don’t worry, be happy: Erasing racism, sexism, and poverty in positive psychology. Psychotherapy and Politics International, 16, e1433. https://doi.org/10.1002/ppi.1433.Google Scholar
Yakushko, O., & Blodgett, E. (2018). Negative reflections about positive psychology: On constraining the field to a focus on happiness and personal achievement. Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 1–28, https://doi.org/10.1177/0022167818794551.Google Scholar
Yap, A. J., Wazlawek, A. S., Lucas, B. J., Cuddy, A. J. C., & Carney, D. R. (2013). The ergonomics of dishonesty: The effect of incidental posture on stealing, cheating, and traffic violations. Psychological Science, 24, 2281–2289.Google Scholar
Zhang, Y., Pan, Z., Li, K., & Guo, Y. (2018). Self-serving bias in memories: Selectively forgetting the connection between negative information and the self. Experimental Psychology, 65, 236–244.Google Scholar
Zimbardo, P. (1972). Pathology of imprisonment. Society, 9, 4–8.Google Scholar
Zimbardo, P. (1973). On the ethics of intervention in human psychological research with special reference to the Stanford Prison Experiment. Cognition, 2, 243–256.Google Scholar
Zimbardo, P. (2007). The Lucifer effect: Understanding how good people turn evil. New York: Random House.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

  • References
  • Fathali M. Moghaddam, Georgetown University, Washington DC
  • Book: Shakespeare and the Experimental Psychologist
  • Online publication: 10 June 2021
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108868945.015
Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

  • References
  • Fathali M. Moghaddam, Georgetown University, Washington DC
  • Book: Shakespeare and the Experimental Psychologist
  • Online publication: 10 June 2021
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108868945.015
Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

  • References
  • Fathali M. Moghaddam, Georgetown University, Washington DC
  • Book: Shakespeare and the Experimental Psychologist
  • Online publication: 10 June 2021
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108868945.015
Available formats
×