Humanistic psychology

COMMENTARY

Multiculturalism and Humanistic Psychology: From Neglect to Epistemological and

Ontological Diversity

Louis Hoffman Saybrook University

This paper considers the history, current status, and future of humanistic psychology and multi- culturalism in the United States, particularly focusing on the Society for Humanistic Psychology as a leading humanistic psychology organization. Humanistic psychology in the United States has struggled in actualizing its valuing of cultural diversity; however, some progress has been made. Through an exploration of history, current challenges can also be illuminated as well as possible ways to respond to these challenges. An embracement of deep diversity in humanistic psychology is called for, which includes an epistemological and ontological diversity. Furthermore, the implications of Granger’s (2012) call to invite cultural diversity into the home of humanistic psychology are explored. A deep diversity in humanistic psychology includes a broad, inclusive understanding of science as well as an embracement of ways of knowing that are embedded in culture, stories, and poetry. The paper concludes with recommendations for future directions.

Keywords: multiculturalism, diversity, humanistic psychology, existential psychology, epistemo- logical diversity

The focus I chose for my year of service as president of the Society for Humanistic Psychology was cultural diversity. I chose this focus for three primary reasons. First, humanistic psychology in the United States since early in its development has voiced that it values cultural diversity. Despite some notable efforts to address multiculturalism and diversity, it has failed in actualizing this value. This failure can be seen in multiple ways that will be discussed. Second, humanistic psychology has something to offer multicul- tural psychology that potentially can contribute to advancing conceptualizations, theory, and research on diversity issues and culture. Third, dialogue on multicultural issues will help humanistic psychology advance and evolve in ways that increase its relevance and ability to impact the world in a positive way.

This paper was originally presented as the 2013 Society for Humanistic Psychology Presidential Address at the American Psychological Association Convention, Honolulu, HI. This version includes stylistic modifications and updates. I thank Heatherlyn Cleare-Hoffman, Nathaniel Granger, Jr., Theopia Jackson, and David St. John for feedback on various drafts of the manuscript.

Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Louis Hoffman, Department of Humanistic and Clinical Psychology, School of Psychology and Interdisciplinary Inquiry, Saybrook University, 475 14th Street, Oakland, CA 94612. E-mail: [email protected]

T hi

s do

cu m

en t

is co

py ri

gh te

d by

th e

A m

er ic

an P

sy ch

ol og

ic al

A ss

oc ia

ti on

or on

e of

it s

al li

ed pu

bl is

he rs

. T

hi s

ar ti

cl e

is in

te nd

ed so

le ly

fo r

th e

pe rs

on al

us e

of th

e in

di vi

du al

us er

an d

is no

t to

be di

ss em

in at

ed br

oa dl

y.

The Humanistic Psychologist © 2016 American Psychological Association 2016, Vol. 44, No. 1, 56 –71 0887-3267/16/$12.00 http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/hum0000016

56

My Journey to Humanistic Psychology and Cultural Diversity

We all have a story. An important belief that humanistic psychology and multicultural psychology share is that one’s own story is important and relevant to one’s scholarship. Yet, my experience has been that individuals in professional psychology and humanistic psychology too often shy away from telling one’s stories. As I have spoken about cultural diversity over the past 8 or 9 years, I have told my story many times. Perhaps in this article I can tell it a bit differently. Yet, I have a great deal of hesitancy in telling my story in a paper about multiculturalism as I represent the voice of a privileged White male. Too often, even in the dialogues about multiculturalism and diversity, the voices of the privileged become the focus of the conversation. When I began my advocacy for multiculturalism and diversity, my goals were to help bring forward and create space for the voices of multiculturalism that had more experience and wisdom with this topic than I did. While over time much of my focus has remained on empowering voices with deeper wisdom than myself, I have also become more comfortable in my own role as an ally and advocate who still needs to listen and learn.

I grew up in small town in rural Iowa where I never had to think about cultural diversity. Most of my life until graduate school remained pretty limited as far as cultural diversity was concerned. I heard the stereotypes and prejudices with innocent ears, not knowing the implications of what I heard. When I encountered racism I wondered about the anger and hatred, and often thought that it was not right. Yet, I did not think much about the pain of the recipients of this prejudice and racism; my reaction was primarily a detached appraisal that such behavior was wrong.

Graduate school opened me up to a very different world. I was far away from home, and for a small-town Iowa boy, Los Angeles seemed just as foreign as Oz. In general, I received very good graduate training. When going on my internship interviews, I quickly began to sense that I was better trained and prepared than most of my peers from others schools. However, I was not trained at all in humanistic psychology and knew little about it except for what I learned from the prejudices of my professors, which was primarily negative and often inaccurate. In my undergraduate and graduate training, I do not remember qualitative research ever being mentioned nor do I remember a substantive discussion about humanistic or existential psychology until I sought it on my own. I happened to hear of existential psychology through my roommate, and toward the end of my program found a couple of professors who had some interest in it, including Winston Gooden who agreed to teach an independent study focusing on existential and interper- sonal psychology. Once I discovered existential psychology, I knew I had found a theoretical home and began reading voraciously.

Similarly, I learned very little about cultural diversity. Although early in my career I generally felt I was a competent therapist and even a competent instructor, I was not well-prepared to work with cultural diversity as a clinician or professor. What I did experience with cultural diversity often felt fearful and threatening, so I avoided it. On a cognitive level, I believed it was important, but I longed to move back to the Midwest and the very homogenous environment where I grew up. I felt that back home I could be an advocate for multiculturalism at a distance, where it felt safe.

As I began my internship and postdoctoral residency, things began to change. Because I read a lot about existential psychology, I was perceived as an expert and was asked to teach a course on it. Because of a number of difficult transitions in my personal life, I also began an intensive period of self-reflection. This just happened to coincide with various opportunities to learn and reflect more deeply about diversity, including attending a

T hi

s do

cu m

en t

is co

py ri

gh te

d by

th e

A m

er ic

an P

sy ch

ol og

ic al

A ss

oc ia

ti on

or on

e of

it s

al li

ed pu

bl is

he rs

. T

hi s

ar ti

cl e

is in

te nd

ed so

le ly

fo r

th e

pe rs

on al

us e

of th

e in

di vi

du al

us er

an d

is no

t to

be di

ss em

in at

ed br

oa dl

y.

57MULTICULTURALISM AND HUMANISTIC PSYCHOLOGY

Tavistock Conference in St. Louis that focused on diversity and identity. The Tavistock conference profoundly impacted me. I was forced to confront some of my blind spots and hidden prejudices. Had it not been for this experience, I am certain much of my life would be quite different today.

As I began experiencing cultural diversity on an experiential level, instead of just a cognitive level, I recognized how unprepared I was to work with multicultural issues clinically or in my teaching. I returned to school to focus largely on multiculturalism; however, I did so at progressive seminary where I could focus on ethnic diversity, gender issues, and religious diversity. I also met and began a relationship with an amazing Black woman who would become my wife and a patient mentor about culture. Cultural diversity began to take on a different meaning in my life; it became part of my home and part of my identity. Similar to what occurred with existential psychology, because I voiced an interested in cultural diversity I soon began to be seen as a multicultural expert in the homogenous settings I worked and was asked to teach multicultural courses. Although I felt minimally competent at best to teach these courses, I felt compelled to take on this challenge.

As I returned to the classroom as a student, one of the lessons that stood out to me was the importance of situating scholarship in our personal experience. I had always been taught to keep myself out of my research and scholarship; now I was recognizing that this was not possible, and I was being pushed to always include this personal context in my scholarship. I also began gradually integrating cultural diversity into some of my schol- arship and quickly realized that the only way I could authentically do this is by being honest about my story. Ironically, even in humanistic psychology, where we also recog- nize the value of our stories, I still sometimes get criticized for this practice, but generally only when the topic is cultural diversity. At times, it is viewed as narcissistic or self-indulgent. Yet, I choose to take the criticism and remain authentic.

Although multiculturalism was an increasingly important topic to me, and existential psychology was my passion, for some time I kept these interests largely separate prior to gradually and tentatively integrating cultural diversity into my work in existential and humanistic psychology. When the call for papers came for the First Annual Conference of the Society for Humanistic Psychology, I began talking with some of my students about collaborating on a presentation. Several were interested in cultural diversity and asked if we could do something on humanistic psychology and multiculturalism. As we looked in the literature, it seemed evident that very little had been done in this area, so we put together a proposal. It was rejected. I still went to the conference, and about 10 students came with me.

The conference was the beginning of my involvement in the Society for Humanistic Psychology, which I knew little about prior to this. The conference, for me, was quite exciting and inspiring. However, as I spoke to my students afterward, many had a very different experience. While they enjoyed the presentations and felt they learned a lot from them, they were disappointed and even upset that most of the presentations were by “older white males.” They even did the research to tell me the exact percentage of speakers who were White males, which was nearly 80%.

My initial response was defensiveness. I was starting to find a home in humanistic psychology and the Society for Humanistic Psychology, and I wanted to protect this. I was even a bit irritated at these students for challenging and criticizing my new home. But I listened, and I am glad I did. As I listened, I could hear the pain that was reflected in their experience at that first conference. They did not feel seen or valued, and they did not feel that humanistic psychology was interested in who they were. After processing this for a

T hi

s do

cu m

en t

is co

py ri

gh te

d by

th e

A m

er ic

an P

sy ch

ol og

ic al

A ss

oc ia

ti on

or on

e of

it s

al li

ed pu

bl is

he rs

. T

hi s

ar ti

cl e

is in

te nd

ed so

le ly

fo r

th e

pe rs

on al

us e

of th

e in

di vi

du al

us er

an d

is no

t to

be di

ss em

in at

ed br

oa dl

y.

58 HOFFMAN

while, I suggested, “Let’s do something about it.” And we did. In the subsequent years, there has been a dramatic increase in the number of presentations on multiculturalism, and these conversations have progressively reflected greater depth. I want to emphasize one point here: Students led the way. Students identified the problem, and students were a large part of the solution. I am proud, too, that humanistic psychology has listened. My experience is that humanistic psychology has changed since that time, but I will get to that later.

I began my career as an objective, mainstream psychologist trained in cognitive- behavioral therapy and other solution-focused approaches, comfortable behind my pro- tective walls of White privilege. Today, my career is much different. As I reflect on what changed me, it was not the rational or persuasive arguments. It was a process of self-exploration, listening to the stories of others, and building relationships.

My personal story has changed, too. Where I began my story, I recognized the racism and other prejudices that surrounded me, and for the most part, attempted to reject them. However, even though I intellectually rejected them as wrong, I still identified with the aggressor. This is where my attention was drawn, this is who I noticed, this is who I could more easily relate to. I could more readily see the injustice of the aggressor than the pain of the victim. Over time and with many life experiences, much has changed with this, too.

A couple of years ago in Pittsburgh at a Society for Humanistic Psychology Confer- ence, Granger (2012) presented on the topic of “Where are all the African American humanistic psychologists?” Afterward he was asked, “What needs to be done to bring more African Americans into humanistic psychology and the Society for Humanistic Psychology?” In his answer, he noted that it is great to invite people like himself to speak at conferences and present papers; however, if we really want to see more African Americans in humanistic psychology, Granger advocated that we needed to invite him into our home. As I have said elsewhere (Hoffman, 2012a), and hopefully is evident, Granger was not looking for dinner invitations; he was creating a powerful metaphor. When we invite someone into our home, we open ourselves up to knowing and being known on a deeper level. We open ourselves to be impacted by them and maybe even to being changed by the meeting. When we invite someone into our home, it becomes personal. Maybe, this is part of why I felt strongly called to make my presidential address more personal, instead of the more scholarly direction originally planned.

Yet, I wonder how much we have heeded Granger’s encouragement. In many ways we have, or at least have begun. First, let me briefly return to my story. When receiving the news alert on my phone that the Zimmerman verdict1 was about to be announced, I was excited and surprised that I was excited. A few minutes later, when reading the verdict, I shouted out in frustration and was surprised by my anger. It was not about the trial. It was not about Zimmerman. It was not even about Trayvon Martin. I shouted out for my three biracial sons. For the next several days, I could not go more than a few waking hours without my mind drifting back to thinking about the painful conversations I would some day need to have with my sons about what it means to be a Black man in America. How do you talk about racism when the soul is still so innocent?

1 George Zimmerman, who was involved in the neighborhood watch program in the neigh- borhood where the killing occurred, was on trial in the state of Florida for killing a 17-year-old African American boy, Trayvon Martin. In his trial, the “Stand Your Ground” law was used in Zimmerman’s defense, and he was found not guilty. This incident and trial instigated much national debate about racial profiling as well as other racial issues in the United States.

T hi

s do

cu m

en t

is co

py ri

gh te

d by

th e

A m

er ic

an P

sy ch

ol og

ic al

A ss

oc ia

ti on

or on

e of

it s

al li

ed pu

bl is

he rs

. T

hi s

ar ti

cl e

is in

te nd

ed so

le ly

fo r

th e

pe rs

on al

us e

of th

e in

di vi

du al

us er

an d

is no

t to

be di

ss em

in at

ed br

oa dl

y.

59MULTICULTURALISM AND HUMANISTIC PSYCHOLOGY

Before I go further, I want to be clear about something. I am not interested in addressing whether this was the correct verdict, although I think that is an important conversation to have in some contexts. Also, I agree that the media at times has covered this in divisive, polarizing ways and recognize this makes it difficult, at times, to have a substantive discussion about the emotional impact of this event. However, as Donna Rockwell (personal communication, 2013) has pointed out, it is better that this is overcovered by the media rather than not covered enough. I am also not saying that if someone did not have a certain emotional reaction to the Zimmerman verdict that she or he is a racist or insensitive. What I am speaking to is the symbolism of Trayvon Martin, which remains powerful regardless of what is thought of the verdict and regardless of one’s perspective pertaining to whether the media has overplayed and sensationalized the coverage of Zimmerman’s trial. The tragedy remains.

If humanistic psychology does not have something to say about Trayvon Martin, I am truly worried about its future. I am not saying what that voice needs to say, but it needs to recognize the deep cultural and personal pain it represents and it needs to say something. It needs to have ears, it needs to have deep compassion, and it needs to have a voice, because sometimes silence is the most devastating of all types of speech. If we are silent, we are likely to continue witnessing— even if not recognized—the silent protest of many choosing not to identify with humanistic psychology or quietly leaving human- istic psychology organizations because of not feeling seen or valued.

When I began dating my wife, not everyone in my life was comfortable with me dating a Black woman. One illustration of this occurred when someone important to me met my future wife. He was someone who grew up in a family that struggled with racism, but he had worked hard to overcome this. He had also been taught that when you do not have anything nice to say, do not say anything at all. When we met, he was silent almost the entire evening and did not recognize that his good intentions with the silence could cause so much pain. Yet it did.

I am not innocent either. After I married my wife, I attended a chamber of commerce meeting in a community we had just moved to. As I joined a small group of White males conversing, they began to talk of racial profiling and the importance of this practice to keep the community safe. When driving home I told this story to my wife and shared how angry I was about it. She responded saying, “What did they say when you told them you were married to a Black woman.” Immediately, I felt convicted in my silence. It is not that we have to speak up every time we see possible racism, but we have to speak up sometimes and sometimes we have to speak.

When I have spoken with people representing various forms of cultural diversity pertaining to why they left humanistic psychology, one of the most common reasons is because of silence. Humanistic psychology was not speaking to issues that were important to these individuals, that were essential to who they were as a person of color, or as a woman, or as a person identifying as gay, lesbian, bisexual, or transgender (LGBT). They were hurt when they witnessed prejudice, racism, or microaggressions, and the response was silence. No one stood up; no one said anything.

This continues to occur on a regular basis as I receive e-mails and messages from individuals telling of their experiences when speaking about cultural diversity in human- istic settings in the United States. Frequently, these individuals feel criticized and personally attacked for addressing the issue. Even strong advocates for cultural diversity often fear to speak out in these situations because they are weary of being the lone voice advocating yet again. It is tiring to advocate for cultural diversity, especially when one often does so alone with intense resistance. I am not suggesting that we need to censor

T hi

s do

cu m

en t

is co

py ri

gh te

d by

th e

A m

er ic

an P

sy ch

ol og

ic al

A ss

oc ia

ti on

or on

e of

it s

al li

ed pu

bl is

he rs

. T

hi s

ar ti

cl e

is in

te nd

ed so

le ly

fo r

th e

pe rs

on al

us e

of th

e in

di vi

du al

us er

an d

is no

t to

be di

ss em

in at

ed br

oa dl

y.

60 HOFFMAN

speech or implement regulations requiring only politically correct speech; I am advocating that when this hostility occurs it is necessary that there is a response stronger than one or two lone voices with many silent supporters.

Bruce Springsteen (2010), in his album “Darkness on the Edge of Town,” stopped singing about running, which was a prominent theme in his earlier albums, and started singing about taking a stand (see Springsteen, Landau, & Van Zandt, 2010). It is a powerful transition in his music. In the song that the album was titled after, he sang,

Tonight I’ll be on that hill ‘cause I cannot stop I’ll be on that hill with everything I’ve got With lives on the line where dreams are found and lost Well, I’ll be there on time and I’ll pay the cost For wanting things that can only be found In the darkness on the edge of town

It is this same Bruce Springsteen (2003), who years later wrote a song “American Skin (41 Shots)” about an unarmed Black man who was shot 41 times by New York police officers when reaching for his wallet. Springsteen was heavily criticized for this, and it likely cost him some fans and record sales. Yet, recently he sang this same song at a concert as a tribute to Trayvon Martin. Once again, “the boss” (i.e., Springsteen) was there on time, and once again he was willing to pay the cost. If we are to consider ourselves cultural diversity advocates, we must be willing to do the same.

If we have heeded Granger’s encouragement, and if we have invited cultural diversity into our home, then what happened with Trayvon Martin and the Zimmerman trial ought to have an impact on what we hear and see in what occurred. Earlier I noted that when I was young, I recognized that there was something wrong when I witnessed racism; however, this recognition was at the cognitive level, at a distance. At the experiential level, I still identified with the privileged group that I was apart of. As my story has changed so has my identifications. So I ask: Has humanistic psychology invited cultural diversity enough into its home that the story of Trayvon Martin feels personal? It is our story, too?

Humanistic Psychology’s Valuing of Diversity

In the United States, humanistic psychology’s struggle to actualize cultural diversity is most obvious in the membership of humanistic psychology groups and organizations, attendance at humanistic conferences and workshops, and contributions to humanistic scholarship. However, there are plenty of other examples. The contributions of important early influential women, such as Charlotte Buehler and Eleanor Criswell, often go unrecognized and are rarely cited. Only 5 of the 59 awards given by the Society for Humanistic Psychology have gone to women, or about 8.5%. With regard to fellows, the numbers are slightly better with 7 out of 42 of our fellows being women, or 16.6%. Eight of our forty-two presidents, or 19%, have been women. The number of people of color represented in these categories is even smaller. There are some historical factors, such as the number of people representing various forms of diversity entering the field of psychology over time, that are important to consider in interpreting these statistics. However, the minimal change reflected over time, despite changes in the field at large, reflect that this continues to be a problem that needs addressing.

Matt Thelen (2010), in his bibliometric study of the Journal of Humanistic Psychol- ogy, found a number of interesting results regarding diversity. Only 17% of the authors

T hi

s do

cu m

en t

is co

py ri

gh te

d by

th e

A m

er ic

an P

sy ch

ol og

ic al

A ss

oc ia

ti on

or on

e of

it s

al li

ed pu

bl is

he rs

. T

hi s

ar ti

cl e

is in

te nd

ed so

le ly

fo r

th e

pe rs

on al

us e

of th

e in

di vi

du al

us er

an d

is no

t to

be di

ss em

in at

ed br

oa dl

y.

61MULTICULTURALISM AND HUMANISTIC PSYCHOLOGY

and coauthors of Journal of Humanistic Psychology articles from 1961 to 2009 were women. Again, there has been some small, gradual improvement over time. However, from 2001–2009 still only 28% of the authors and coauthors were women. Although more difficult to track, there was also evidence of a strong disproportionate number of authors being White males. With the exception of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th ed. (American Psychiatric Association, 2010), all of the top 20 most cited references were written by White males.

Consider for a moment your reaction to these numbers and what that means. Of course, it is important to be cautious in interpreting one’s response, and again I am not suggesting that any particular response is suggestive of sexism or racism. I am more interested in considering what is seen, what is heard, and what is identified with. Might it mean something if we are first drawn to attempts to cognitively understand and explain why this discrepancy occurred rather than considering how these numbers might be experienced by individuals who identify with these underrepresented groups?

Early in my career, I attended a conference on diversity with a colleague. In a discussion, my colleague made a comment I knew to be well-intentioned, yet it was hurtful to many people in attendance. My colleague was strongly and emotionally criticized. I stood up for my colleague and was quickly criticized, noting that it was typical for the White male to step in to defend the intentions of the other White person, not even recognizing the hurt of the people of color. I felt defensive. Still to this day, I believe that what my colleague did was well-intentioned and not intended to harm. Yet, what I did not see and what I did not acknowledge was more important than what I did see. I did not recognize the pain of the many people in the room who were deeply wounded hearing these words as they voiced something that they had often sensed without the direct expression in words. Maybe it could be argued that my reaction was not racism, but at the very least is privilege.

I did not have to see the pain of the many people of color who were hurt. At the very least, I could keep an emotional distance and only acknowledge it at the cognitive level. Many of us do not have to see the pain of those who are hurt and angry that the death of Trayvon Martin, who symbolizes a broad, pervasive cultural experience of being per- ceived as suspicious, dangerous, and threatening; as living a reality in which our children are more likely to be put in jail or killed than those born into privilege. Many of us do not have to take in the experience of what it feels like to be reflected in the underrepresented groups in the statistics mentioned previously. For many of us, it is easier to notice and be drawn to defend people in privilege perceived as not being treated fairly while not recognizing the hurt of many who are more frequently hurt by microaggressions, privi- lege, and more overt forms of racism. In my experience, too, it is common for many people of privilege to advocate for cultural diversity up to the point where it impacts their privilege. To be truly committed to cultural diversity, we must also be willing to give up our privilege. This is not easy, but does reflect a more authentic advocacy.

It is important to examine why these numbers pertaining to cultural diversity in humanistic psychology are what they are. As this is done, maybe the numbers will not seem as bad, at least to a degree. For instance, a number of women have responded to these statistics saying that women in humanistic psychology have been more drawn to practice instead of publishing, academia, and leadership roles; therefore, they may be less likely to appear in certain roles such as division leadership. While this may be true, the numbers in the awards still suggest that we are drawn to acknowledging certain types of achievement over others. They do not explain why important contributions of women are often undervalued, even if these contributions may be of a different form. More impor-

T hi

s do

cu m

en t

is co

py ri

gh te

d by

th e

A m

er ic

an P

sy ch

ol og

ic al

A ss

oc ia

ti on

or on

e of

it s

al li

ed pu

bl is

he rs

. T

hi s

ar ti

cl e

is in

te nd

ed so

le ly

fo r

th e

pe rs

on al

us e

of th

e in

di vi

du al

us er

an d

is no

t to

be di

ss em

in at

ed br

oa dl

y.

62 HOFFMAN

tantly, when the discussions shift too quickly to understanding or even justifying these numbers, or moving quickly to solutions, we are not acknowledging the experience of those who have been neglected and not seen.

In 2001, two important critiques of humanistic psychology from the perspective of cultural diversity were included in Schneider, Bugental, and Pierson’s (2001) The Hand- book of Humanistic Psychology. In Serlin and Criswell’s (2001) chapter on humanistic psychology and women, as well as Jenkins’s (2001) chapter on humanistic psychology and multiculturalism, it was noted that humanistic psychology’s individualistic focus has been a barrier for many women and people of color. They suggested that we needed deeper, cultural changes in humanistic psychology. That same year, Zonya Johnson (2001) wrote an article in The Humanistic Psychologist detailing the importance of humanistic psychologists developing cultural competency. Despite their call to address these issues, little has changed, and these articles as well as a number of others preceding them are rarely cited or even acknowledged. Once again, the response is silence.

Theopia Jackson (2012, see also Hoffman, Cleare-Hoffman, & Jackson, 2014) noted that there are many similarities in the history, values, and ideas of humanistic psychology and black psychology; however, the interaction has not been reciprocal. Although it is improving, it has been much more common for the multicultural psychology literature to cite humanistic psychology than the reverse. In other words, individuals from multicul- tural psychology have sought out engaging humanistic psychology much more than humanistic psychology has sought out and integrated important themes from multicultural psychology. It appears humanistic psychology has not been intentional about engaging issues of diversity and the multicultural psychology literature. Again, these are numbers that we can try to explain, but we need to first consider the impact and what this means.

Beyond the Numbers

It should be evident that I am not just talking about cultural diversity in terms of numbers, although they have helped illustrate various important factors related to the deeper argument. If humanistic psychology’s embracement of cultural diversity is about nothing more than the numbers, then as much disservice as service has been accomplished in becoming more culturally diverse (Hoffman, 2012b). As Bob McInerny (personal conversation) has pointed out in several conversations about cultural diversity, if we are only seeking diversity at the demographic level, it may be nothing more than tokenism. Similarly, Scott Churchill (personal communication) often points out that in talking about diversity, we need to consider epistemological diversity, not just demographics (see Churchill, 2012). Yet, to seek cultural diversity without caring about the numbers is inauthentic and limited as well.

What I am advocating for is an ontological and epistemological diversity that comes about through deep engagement, listening, and dialoguing with multiculturalism. It is onto- logical in talking about different ways of experiencing the world, different ways of relating, and different ways of being in the world that are deeply connected to one’s culture. It is epistemological in that it embraces different ways of knowing, different ways of listening, and different ways of seeing the world. If we are going to embrace a deep diversity in humanistic psychology, we must consider all of these elements (Hoffman, 2012b).

The future of humanistic psychology in the United States needs a deep embracement of multiculturalism. The United States is becoming more culturally diverse. Over time, it is likely that an increasing proportion of clients entering therapy, students entering

T hi

s do

cu m

en t

is co

py ri

gh te

d by

th e

A m

er ic

an P

sy ch

ol og

ic al

A ss

oc ia

ti on

or on

e of

it s

al li

ed pu

bl is

he rs

. T

hi s

ar ti

cl e

is in

te nd

ed so

le ly

fo r

th e

pe rs

on al

us e

of th

e in

di vi

du al

us er

an d

is no

t to

be di

ss em

in at

ed br

oa dl

y.

63MULTICULTURALISM AND HUMANISTIC PSYCHOLOGY

training, professors teaching and training students, and scholars seeking to publish articles will be individuals representing various forms of cultural diversity. If humanistic psy- chology does not deeply engage multicultural issues, it will not be seen as relevant and the influence of its voice will shrink. However, while a deep embracement of diversity and seeking to include more culturally diverse voices in humanistic psychology may be necessary for humanistic psychology to survive and thrive in the United States, this should not be our primary motivation for embracing cultural diversity. We should do this because it is consistent with the values of humanistic psychology, and we are open to being changed by listening deeply to the stories and perspectives of individuals representing various forms of cultural diversity. We should do this out of a commitment to all people. We should do this because humanistic psychology has long sought to be a voice for those who are underrepresented.

There are many signs of hope that we are making strides toward these goals. While this paper is focused on humanistic psychology in the United States, there are many places around the world where humanistic psychology has been flourishing in different cultures. It is important to bring more of the wisdom and scholarship from around the world back to the United States. There are also other examples that could be noted of attempts to integrate cultural diversity; however, it is not the purpose of this paper to identity each of these attempts.

Heroes and Progress

The challenges and problems in humanistic psychology in the United States regarding cultural diversity is only part of the story. Humanistic psychology, and the Society for Humanistic Psychology, has made significant progress in regard to cultural diversity. I am proud to be one very small part of the changes that have come in regard to cultural diversity, particularly through trying to help the voices of people with greater expertise in multiculturalism to be heard in humanistic psychology. The change has come about through a collective effort that includes many people who have gone unrecognized. This section of the paper documents some of the progress that has been made through acknowledging important contributors to multicultural scholarship and practice in human- istic psychology, again focusing on humanistic psychology in the United States and as represented in the Society for Humanistic Psychology. But this paper can only tell part of the story and many voices will go unrecognized. A more thorough accounting of everyone who made attempts or significant contributions is beyond what could be adequately done in a short paper such as this. Many of the attempts to integrate multiculturalism into humanistic psychology have received little attention and rarely have been cited in the scholarly humanistic literature published in the United States. In this section, I focus mostly on the attempts to integrate multiculturalism connected to the Society for Human- istic Psychology, particularly those that have been part of progress that has been made in increasing the cultural diversity in the publications and conferences connected to the Society for Humanistic Psychology.

There are a number of people who have been advocating for cultural diversity in humanistic psychology in the United States in various ways for many years, but it seemed there was not enough momentum or openness for the deeper change to begin. Eleanor Criswell (personal communication, 2013), in her year as president of Society for Human- istic Psychology, drafted a statement on multiculturalism and attempted to facilitate discussions about embracing multiculturalism. Adelbert Jenkins (1982, 2001); Maureen

T hi

s do

cu m

en t

is co

py ri

gh te

d by

th e

A m

er ic

an P

sy ch

ol og

ic al

A ss

oc ia

ti on

or on

e of

it s

al li

ed pu

bl is

he rs

. T

hi s

ar ti

cl e

is in

te nd

ed so

le ly

fo r

th e

pe rs

on al

us e

of th

e in

di vi

du al

us er

an d

is no

t to

be di

ss em

in at

ed br

oa dl

y.

64 HOFFMAN

O’Hara (1996); Ilene Serlin and Eleanor Criswell (2001); and Zonya Johnson (2001) were among the first voices advocating for diversity in humanistic psychology in the scholarly literature. Maureen O’Hara, in various leadership roles with Saybrook University, Na- tional University, the Society for Humanistic Psychology, and other organizations, advo- cated strongly for cultural diversity, including an important feminist critique of Carl Rogers (O’Hara, 1996). Serlin, too, advocated for diversity beyond her important schol- arship, including various leadership roles in the Society for Humanistic Psychology. Even though, as I have noted, these voices did not always have the impact or receive the recognition that they deserved, they should not be undervalued and have played an essential role in preparing for the recent cultural diversity movement in humanistic psychology. My hope is that through acknowledgment, these important contributions will be valued more deeply and recognized for their importance.

Kirk Schneider has also played an important, although underacknowledged, role in creating a place for diversity. In two of his edited volumes, Schneider (2008; Schneider et al., 2001) was intentional about bringing in authors who were able to speak to issues of cultural diversity. Also, as Jackson (2012) has noted, when searching for diversity and existential psychology in the scholarly literature and search engines, it is Schneider’s name that most frequently emerges, often in his editorials at the beginning of issues of the Journal of Humanistic Psychology as well as the chapters in his edited books. During his tenure as editor of the Journal of Humanistic Psychology, he expanded the editorial board to include more multicultural scholars, which brought greater depth of expertise to the board. Shawn Rubin has continued this progress as the current editor of the Journal of Humanistic Psychology. Scott Churchill similarly has been intentional in his leadership with The Humanistic Psychologist to increase the international focus and representation.

An important part of the seeds of the recent multicultural movement in humanistic psychology began with several students at the Colorado School of Professional Psychol- ogy who attended the First Annual Conference of Society for Humanistic Psychology and voiced their concern about the lack of cultural diversity. Although I do not remember all who spoke out about this issue, I remember conversations with Anna House, Christin Gregory, and Marika Bowser, all of whom are now graduates that have entered the field. Not only did these students voice their concern, but they showed the courage to present critiques of humanistic psychology from a cultural perspective at the next Society for Humanistic Psychology annual conference. In those early conferences, it was largely students who were active in presenting on multicultural issues.

Three other students, who I have continued to work with as colleagues since they have graduated, played an important role for me personally. Jason Dias, Trent Claypool, and Michael Moats caught the spirit of cultural diversity, and in particular, began speaking about White privilege and international issues. In several instances where I did not adequately consider multiculturalism in various leadership roles I served, they spoke up and reminded me of this. Additionally, each of them have joined the conversation in their own ways advocating for diversity in humanistic psychology.

Here, too, I must acknowledge someone who has been under recognized in her contributions. Heatherlyn Cleare-Hoffman was the person who taught multiculturalism to many of these students from the Colorado School of Professional Psychology and inspired them to catch the passion that they brought to conferences and their own scholarship. Her ability to challenge in a soft and compassionate way embodies an approach to difficult dialogues that is particularly useful when engaging issues of cultural diversity. In addition to this, Cleare-Hoffman (2009, 2011; Cleare-Hoffman & Hoffman, 2013; Cleare- Hoffman, Hoffman, & Wilson, 2013; Hoffman & Cleare-Hoffman, 2011) contributed her

T hi

s do

cu m

en t

is co

py ri

gh te

d by

th e

A m

er ic

an P

sy ch

ol og

ic al

A ss

oc ia

ti on

or on

e of

it s

al li

ed pu

bl is

he rs

. T

hi s

ar ti

cl e

is in

te nd

ed so

le ly

fo r

th e

pe rs

on al

us e

of th

e in

di vi

du al

us er

an d

is no

t to

be di

ss em

in at

ed br

oa dl

y.

65MULTICULTURALISM AND HUMANISTIC PSYCHOLOGY

own inspiring scholarship and presentations, and has been someone who has taught me much about multiculturalism.

Brent Robbins played an important role as the Society for Humanistic Psychology Conference Chair. He listened to the feedback about the concerns related to the lack of cultural diversity and worked to create space for multicultural presentations and dialogues as well as seeking out keynotes and invited speakers who could begin to bring multicul- tural perspectives to humanistic psychology. Additionally, he contributed his own valu- able scholarship (Robbins, 2010). It has been at the Society for Humanistic Psychology Annual Conferences where much of the early energy and scholarship pertaining to cultural diversity developed and advanced. These early stages focused on helping humanistic psychology recognize the need to address and continue addressing issues of diversity. The last few years have reflected a movement into greater depth in regards to diversity.

Louise Sundararijan started one of the most successful cultural initiatives in human- istic psychology with the Indigenous Psychology Task Force (www.indigenouspsych.org). This has grown to include many leading scholars from around the world. Unfortunately, this task force is not known by many who are active in the Society for Humanistic Psychology; however, hopefully it will be increasingly recognized for the important work it is doing as it continues to promote dialogues, share resources, and facilitate scholarship.

Similarly, Mark Yang and Xuefu Wang have been important advocates for cultural diversity from an international perspective; however, have done so in a way that has engaged humanistic and existential psychology in the United States. Yang and Wang have been writing from an international perspective and began regularly traveling from China to the United States to present on international issues and perspectives in humanistic and existential psychology (see Wang, 2009, 2011; Yang, 2009; Yang, 2012; Yang & Hoffman, 2011). Yang is an adjunct faculty member at Saybrook University whose focus is on developing interna- tional psychology programs on humanistic and existential psychology, which includes a new International Psychology Certificate offered through Saybrook University. These efforts of Yang and Wang have deepened the dialogue between Chinese and United States scholars through including international perspectives and well as indigenous psychologies. Thus, it has moved beyond the international focus in Asia to include promoting cultural diversity in humanistic psychology in the United States.

David St. John and students from the Michigan School of Professional Psychology joined the conversation and began presenting at the Society for Humanistic Psychology Annual Conference. Their poster presentations and conference papers frequently ad- dressed ways multiculturalism could be integrated in clinical settings. At Saybrook University, a leading humanistic school, Zonya Johnson and colleagues have developed a certificate on multiculturalism and social justice.

A little over 2 years ago, Nathaniel Granger emerged as an important and inspiring voice at the Society for Humanistic Psychology Annual Conference in Pittsburgh, where he was an invited speaker. In addition to two important scholarly presentations, Granger (2012; Robbins, Alsup, Beshai, Granger, & Selig, 2012) performed a reenactment of Martin Luther King, Jr.’s “I Have a Dream Speech,” leaving many in tears and speechless. At this same conference, he challenged humanistic psychology to create a home for diversity. Granger is now an adjunct faculty member at Saybrook University teaching courses that deeply integrate multicultural issues, such as microaggressions, with human- istic and existential psychology.

At the Society for Humanistic Psychology Conference in Pittsburgh in 2012, Theopia Jackson emerged, making a powerful impact. Jackson has taught at Saybrook University for many years, yet somehow her talents and contributions managed to go unrecognized

T hi

s do

cu m

en t

is co

py ri

gh te

d by

th e

A m

er ic

an P

sy ch

ol og

ic al

A ss

oc ia

ti on

or on

e of

it s

al li

ed pu

bl is

he rs

. T

hi s

ar ti

cl e

is in

te nd

ed so

le ly

fo r

th e

pe rs

on al

us e

of th

e in

di vi

du al

us er

an d

is no

t to

be di

ss em

in at

ed br

oa dl

y.

66 HOFFMAN

by humanistic psychology. In addition to a powerful presentation at the Society for Humanistic Psychology Annual Conference (Jackson, 2012), Jackson also was someone who made important contributions through her dialogues and engagement during presen- tations she attended. Jackson has pointed to the parallel history of humanistic psychology and the development of Black psychology in the United States. In doing this, she has demonstrated that while Black psychology has often sought to engage humanistic psy- chology, this has less frequently been reciprocated (see also Hoffman et al., 2014). An important part of Granger and Jackson’s contribution is that they both are able to speak directly and honestly to their experience and perspective within humanistic psychology.

In Pittsburgh, the content on cultural diversity was significantly deeper than in previous years. In addition to the presentations by Granger and Jackson, there was a symposium on Martin Luther King Jr.’s beloved community and its relevance to human- istic psychology (Robbins et al., 2012), a symposium honoring the contributions of important woman humanistic psychologists (Bargdill et al., 2012), a presentation by several faculty and students at the Michigan School of Professional Psychology on a multicultural humanistic psychology (Blau et al., 2012), and a symposium critiquing individualism and its impact upon humanistic psychology (Hoffman, Granger, Jackson, & Yang, 2012). This paved the way for deeper experiential, epistemological, and ontological engagement with multiculturalism at the next conference.

At the 2013 Society for Humanistic Psychology Annual Conference, during the diversity task force sponsored lunch and a presentation on multicultural variations in the experience and expression of authenticity (Hoffman et al., 2013), the dialogues shifted to a new level of emotional depth. This, in addition to a powerful keynote by Shelly Harrell (2013), reflected to many who have been part of the multicultural dialogues in the Society for Humanistic Psychology that we have moved to a new level of depth in our engagement with multicultural issues. Harrell’s keynote integrated music, dance, and cultural ways of being and knowing. It symbolized a shift in the ontological diversity, or embracing different cultural ways of being.

Last, Nathaniel Granger, Theopia Jackson, and David St. John were appointed to cochair a Society for Humanistic Psychology task force on diversity. I am very pleased that Brent Robbins and Krishna Kumar maintained the task force during their presidential year, and Kirk Schneider agreed to continue this task force through his presidency. This task force has begun to accumulate feedback from the Society for Humanistic Psychology membership pertaining to diversity issues and hosted a diversity lunch at the Sixth Annual Society for Humanistic Psychology Conference. At the diversity lunch, they began gathering a network of individuals interested in cultural diversity in humanistic psychol- ogy for networking and advancing the discussions. The lunch was very well attended and identified by many as a highlight of the conference.

Where to From Here?

As a paper for a presidential address, there is much that it is not possible to include. In continued scholarship on this topic, it will be important to integrate other important work by people identifying with humanistic psychology, such as Jenkins (1982); Monheit (1995); Moodley, Lago, and Talahite (2004); and Rice (1995). In considering works such as these, it will be important to consider why they have often been ignored and rarely cited in the humanistic scholarly literature, despite being important and noteworthy contribu- tions.

T hi

s do

cu m

en t

is co

py ri

gh te

d by

th e

A m

er ic

an P

sy ch

ol og

ic al

A ss

oc ia

ti on

or on

e of

it s

al li

ed pu

bl is

he rs

. T

hi s

ar ti

cl e

is in

te nd

ed so

le ly

fo r

th e

pe rs

on al

us e

of th

e in

di vi

du al

us er

an d

is no

t to

be di

ss em

in at

ed br

oa dl

y.

67MULTICULTURALISM AND HUMANISTIC PSYCHOLOGY

Before closing, I want to make several more specific recommendations pertaining to where humanistic psychology needs to go from here to advance the work on cultural diversity:

1. Humanistic psychology must continue to be intentional about cultural diversity. Throughout much of its history, many in humanistic psychology in the United States have believed that if humanistic psychology values cultural diversity, then cultural diversity will find its way to humanistic psychology. This strategy has not worked. If humanistic psychology wants to be culturally diverse, including at the epistemological and ontological levels, it must continue to be intentional about cultural diversity. This intentionality should be in scholarship, social action, and leadership. It must include representation as well as multicultural scholarship.

2. Humanistic psychology must seek out ways to recognize contributions and excellence within a broad array of individuals making various types of profes- sional contributions. It cannot just recognize excellence in traditional scholar- ship; humanistic psychology must find ways to recognize diverse forms of professional activities including applied contributions, such as clinical practice, training, advocacy, and activism.

3. Humanistic psychology must be intentional in seeking to appreciate and value different types of scholarship in additional to more traditional humanistic schol- arship. This may include scholarship that draws from clinical practice and expertise, the arts, indigenous practice, experiential scholarship, and cultural ways of knowing and expression. Many of these contributions occur in trainings, experiential workshops, and other settings that have not always been recognized.

4. Humanistic psychology must be open to recognizing and acknowledging the presence of humanistic microaggressions and other forms of racism—intentional or unintentional—that find their way into humanistic psychology. When these occur, those identifying as humanistic must not be silent and hope that they will go away, but instead they must speak to them. Often, the silence in response to microaggressions is just as painful as the microaggression itself. Furthermore, silence can serve to further silence many who are quietly observing, trying to determine if it is safe or worth the significant investment it requires to speak out on such sensitive and controversial issues. Multicultural advocates in humanistic psychology must have the courage to speak when these microaggressions occur. Furthermore, it cannot be left solely to people who represent various forms of cultural diversity to speak out; allies need to have a strong voice as well while being intentional about not becoming the focus of the conversation.

5. Humanistic psychology must remain open to what issues and experiences are important to individuals from different cultural backgrounds and create a space to dialogue about these, develop relevant scholarship, and engage in appropriate social action that address these concerns.

6. Humanistic psychology must remain open to cultural critique. If humanistic psychology is to deeply engage multiculturalism, it is possible that it may discover challenges to some preciously held beliefs and values. It is important that humanistic psychology remains open to reconsidering and adapting these values through thoughtful reflection and dialogue. This can help humanistic psychology become more culturally sensitive while advancing humanistic psy- chology.

T hi

s do

cu m

en t

is co

py ri

gh te

d by

th e

A m

er ic

an P

sy ch

ol og

ic al

A ss

oc ia

ti on

or on

e of

it s

al li

ed pu

bl is

he rs

. T

hi s

ar ti

cl e

is in

te nd

ed so

le ly

fo r

th e

pe rs

on al

us e

of th

e in

di vi

du al

us er

an d

is no

t to

be di

ss em

in at

ed br

oa dl

y.

68 HOFFMAN

7. Humanistic psychology needs to build an open and accepting community that values cultural diversity with intentional places to talk about multicultural issues. In other words, to use Granger’s metaphor, humanistic psychology must create a home for cultural diversity.

This is not an all-inclusive list; however, these are some important themes that are essential to begin with as we continue the dialogues.

Celebration and Benediction

It did not seem right to conclude this paper with a summary or conclusion, as the multicultural movement in humanistic psychology in the United States is just getting started and building momentum. Therefore, instead I will close with a celebration and benediction. While the work is not done and it is necessary to be vigilant and intentional about continuing the work of cultural diversity, it is important that humanistic psychology recognizes and celebrates the progress that has been made together. A benediction can serve as a blessing and a commission. The blessing and the commission is for humanistic psychology to move forward continuing to build a diverse, inclusive family with greater depths of learning from each other, greater connection, and deeper love; a blessing to create a home for cultural diversity in humanistic psychology where everyone does not always agree, but the community is open to listening and learning from each other while seeking to understand.

References

American Psychiatric Association. (2010). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (4th ed., text rev.). Washington, DC: Author.

Bargdill, R., Bridges, S., Fischer, C., Heery, M., Serlin, I., & Sundararajan, L. (2012, March/April). Honoring women of humanistic psychology. Symposium presented at the Fifth Annual Confer- ence of the Society for Humanistic Psychology, Pittsburgh, PA.

Blau, D., St. John, D., Muenk, E., Christensen, R., Drake, P., & Shilaku, K. (2012, March/April). Sharing worlds: Toward a humanistic multicultural psychology in clinical practice. Presentation at the Fifth Annual Society for Humanistic Psychology Annual Conference, Pittsburgh, PA.

Churchill, S. (2012). Humanistic psychology and STEM disciplines: Strange bedfellows? The Humanistic Psychologist, 40, 221–223. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08873267.2012.704334

Cleare-Hoffman, H. P. (2009). Junkanoo: A Bahamian cultural myth. In L. Hoffman, M. Yang, F. J. Kaklauskas, & A. Chan (Eds.), Existential psychology east–west (pp. 363–372). Colorado Springs, CO: University of the Rockies Press.

Cleare-Hoffman, H. P. (2011, November). An existential analysis of Junkanoo. Poster presented at the 2011 Caribbean Regional Conference of Psychology, Nassau, Bahamas.

Cleare-Hoffman, H. P., & Hoffman, L. (2013, August). The meaning and history of Junkanoo for Bahamian culture. Poster presented at the 121st Annual Convention of the American Psycho- logical Association, Honolulu, HI.

Cleare-Hoffman, H. P., Hoffman, L., & Wilson, S. S. (2013, August). Existential therapy, culture, and therapist factors in evidence-based practice. In K. Keenan (Chair), Evidence in support of existential-humanistic psychotherapy: Revitalizing the third force. Symposium presented at the 121st Annual Convention of the American Psychological Association, Honolulu, HI.

Granger, N., Jr. (2012, March). Fulfilling the dream: Where are all the African American psychol- ogists? Paper presented at the Fifth Annual Society for Humanistic Psychology Annual Con- ference, Pittsburgh, PA.

T hi

s do

cu m

en t

is co

py ri

gh te

d by

th e

A m

er ic

an P

sy ch

ol og

ic al

A ss

oc ia

ti on

or on

e of

it s

al li

ed pu

bl is

he rs

. T

hi s

ar ti

cl e

is in

te nd

ed so

le ly

fo r

th e

pe rs

on al

us e

of th

e in

di vi

du al

us er

an d

is no

t to

be di

ss em

in at

ed br

oa dl

y.

69MULTICULTURALISM AND HUMANISTIC PSYCHOLOGY

Harrell, S. P. (2013, February/March). Through the eyes of love and justice: Re-visioning a multicultural humanistic psychology. Keynote address presented at Sixth Annual Conference of the Society for Humanistic Psychology, Santa Barbara, CA.

Hoffman, L. (2012a, April). Creating diversity in the home of humanistic psychology. Society for Humanistic Psychology Newsletter. Retrieved from http://www.apadivisions.org/division-32/ publications/newsletters/humanistic/2012/04/creating-diversity.aspx

Hoffman, L. (2012b, October). Toward a deep diversity of humanistic psychology: Facing our challenges, embracing our opportunities. Society for Humanistic Psychology Newsletter. Re- trieved from http://www.apadivisions.org/division-32/publications/newsletters/humanistic/2012/ 10/embracing-deep-diversity.aspx

Hoffman, L., Clark, J., Dawn, H., Merchant, D., Smylie, T., Thomas-Franklin, M., . . . Wilson, S. (2013, February/March). Multicultural variations in the experience and expression of authen- ticity: Implications for therapy and practice. Paper presented at the 6th Annual Society for Humanistic Psychology Conference, Santa Barbara, CA.

Hoffman, L., & Cleare-Hoffman, H. P. (2011). Existential therapy and emotions: Lessons from cross-cultural exchange. The Humanistic Psychologist, 39, 261–267. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/ 08873267.2011.594342

Hoffman, L., Cleare-Hoffman, H. P., & Jackson, T. (2014). Humanistic psychology and multicul- turalism: History, current status, and advancements. In K. J. Schneider, J. F. Pierson, & J. F. T. Bugental (Eds.), The handbook of humanistic psychology: Theory, research, and practice (2nd ed., pp. 41–55). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Hoffman, L., Granger, N., Jr., Jackson, T., & Yang, M. (2012). The collective and the individual in humanistic psychology: Implications of moving beyond the individualistic bias. Symposium presented at the 5th Annual Society for Humanistic Psychology Conference, Pittsburgh, PA.

Jackson, T. (2012, March). The tale of two cities: Humanistic psychology within a cultural context. In L. Hoffman (Chair), The collective and the individual in humanistic psychology: Implications of moving beyond the individualist bias. Symposium presented at the 5th Annual Society of Humanistic Psychology Conference, Pittsburgh, PA.

Jenkins, A. H. (1982). The psychology of the Afro-American: A humanistic approach. New York, NY: Pergamon Press.

Jenkins, A. H. (2001). Humanistic psychology and multiculturalism: A review and reflection. In K. J. Schneider, J. F. T. Bugental, & J. F. Pierson (Eds.), The handbook of humanistic psychology: Leading edges in theory, research, and practice (pp. 38 –45). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781412976268.n4

Johnson, Z. (2001). Cultural competency and humanistic psychology. The Humanistic Psychologist, 29, 204 –222. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08873267.2001.9977014

Monheit, J. (1995). A gay and lesbian perspective: The case of Marcia. In K. J. Schneider & R. May (Eds.), The psychology of existence: An integrative, clinical perspective (pp. 226 –233). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

Moodley, R., Lago, C., & Talahite, A. (Eds.). (2004). Carl Rogers counsels a black client: Race and culture in person-centered counseling. Ross-on-Wye, United Kingdom: PCCS Books.

O’Hara, M. (1996). Rogers and Sylvia: A feminist analysis. In B. A. Farber, D. C. Brink, & P. M. Raskin (Eds.), The psychotherapy of Carl Rogers: Cases and commentary (pp. 284 –300). New York, NY: Guilford Press.

Rice, D. (1995). An African American perspective: The case of Marcia. In K. J. Schneider & R. May (Eds.), The psychology of existence: An integrative, clinical perspective (pp. 204 –214). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

Robbins, B. D. (2010, October). An existential phenomenological approach to the issue of diversity. In L. Hoffman (Chair), The need for diversity in existential and humanistic psychology. Symposium at the Third Annual Conference of the Society for Humanistic Psychology, Colorado Springs, CO.

Robbins, B. D., Alsup, R., Beshai, J. A., Granger, N., Jr., & Selig, J. (2012, March/April). Marin Luther King’s vision of the beloved community and humanistic psychology: Common ground.

T hi

s do

cu m

en t

is co

py ri

gh te

d by

th e

A m

er ic

an P

sy ch

ol og

ic al

A ss

oc ia

ti on

or on

e of

it s

al li

ed pu

bl is

he rs

. T

hi s

ar ti

cl e

is in

te nd

ed so

le ly

fo r

th e

pe rs

on al

us e

of th

e in

di vi

du al

us er

an d

is no

t to

be di

ss em

in at

ed br

oa dl

y.

70 HOFFMAN

Symposium presented at the Fifth Annual Conference of the Society for Humanistic Psychology, Pittsburgh, PA.

Schneider, K. J. (Ed.). (2008). Existential-integrative psychotherapy: Guideposts to the core of practice. New York, NY: Routledge.

Schneider, K. J., Bugental, J. F. T., & Pierson, J. F. (Eds.). (2001). The handbook of humanistic psychology: Leading edges in theory, research, and practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Serlin, I., & Criswell, E. (2001). Humanistic psychology and women: A critical-historical perspec- tive. In K. J. Schneider, J. F. T. Bugental, & J. F. Pierson (Eds.), The handbook of humanistic psychology: Leading edges in theory, research, and practice (pp. 28 –36). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781412976268.n3

Springsteen, B. (2003). American skin (41 shots). On the Essential Bruce Springsteen [CD]. United States: Columbia/Legacy.

Springsteen, B. (2010). The promise: The darkness on the edge of town story [Box Set, Deluxe Ed.]. New York, NY: Columbia.

Springsteen, B., Landau, J., & Van Zandt, S. (Producer). (2010). The promise: The Darkness on the Edge of Town story [Motion picture]. United States: Columbia.

Thelen, M. (2010). A bibliometic study of the Journal of Humanistic Psychology. Retrieved from Proquest Dissertations and Theses database. (UMI No. 3466603)

Wang, X. (2009). Spiritual warrior in search of meaning: An existential view of Lu Xun through his life and incidences and analogies. In L. Hoffman, M. Yang, F. J. Kaklauskas, & A. Chan (Eds.), Existential psychology east–west (pp. 149 –164). Colorado Springs, CO: University of the Rockies Press.

Wang, X. (2011). Zhi mian and existential psychology. The Humanistic Psychologist, 39, 240 –246. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08873267.2011.592465

Yang, M. (2009). Existential themes in the parables of Jesus. In L. Hoffman, M. Yang, F. J. Kaklauskas, & A. Chan (Eds.), Existential psychology east–west (pp. 177–196). Colorado Springs, CO: University of the Rockies Press.

Yang, M. (2012, March/April). Existential themes within the Tao Te Ching. Paper presented at the Fifth Annual Conference of the Society for Humanistic Psychology, Pittsburgh, PA.

Yang, M., & Hoffman, L. (2011). Introduction to the special section on the first international conference on existential psychology. The Humanistic Psychologist, 39, 236 –239. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1080/08873267.2011.592467

Received September 10, 2014 Accepted October 11, 2015 �

T hi

s do

cu m

en t

is co

py ri

gh te

d by

th e

A m

er ic

an P

sy ch

ol og

ic al

A ss

oc ia

ti on

or on

e of

it s

al li

ed pu

bl is

he rs

. T

hi s

ar ti

cl e

is in

te nd

ed so

le ly

fo r

th e

pe rs

on al

us e

of th

e in

di vi

du al

us er

an d

is no

t to

be di

ss em

in at

ed br

oa dl

y.

71MULTICULTURALISM AND HUMANISTIC PSYCHOLOGY