| Abstract: | Responds to M. M. Sokal's (1981) criticism of the authors' (see record 1980-09551-001) omission of H. Münsterberg's book from their discussion of psychology and law. It is argued that the authors' historical review was intended to begin with a point in time at which psychological research had been accepted by the legal field and that in the early 1900s, Münsterberg's novel ideas about the psychologist's contribution to legal problems were not widely accepted. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved) |
