Psychological Society of South Africa. All rights reserved. South African Journal of Psychology, 42(4), 2012, pp. 564-575 ISSN 0081-2463 Historicising the relevance debate: South African and American psychology in context Daniel Sher and Wahbie Long Department of Psychology, University of Cape Town, South Africa wahbie.long@uct.ac.za The relevance debate in psychology can be described as discourse which calls for the discipline to become more socially valuable and accessible to those who purportedly need it. Literature suggests that there is a socio-historical dimension to relevance discourse that is frequently overlooked by those engaging in the debate, resulting in a typically ahistorical and axiomatic presentation. It is therefore argued that an historical perspective on the relevance debate is necessary for an informed consideration of its attending issues. This paper compares relevance discourse from South Africa (1974–1994) and the United States of America (1960–1980) by means of a thematic analysis of jour- nal articles published during these periods in the South African Journal of Psychology and American Psychologist, respectively. The analysis yielded six key analytic themes: social upheaval; the pure- applied dichotomy in psychology; the role of psychology in socio-political matters; the place of human values in science; equity in psychology; and indigenising psychology. The first five themes are com- mon to both the American and South African debates. Consequently, it is argued that the two debates arose in similar social contexts and that, in particular, the relevance debate is associated with con- ditions of social upheaval. This historicisation of relevance discourse permits a more critical and accurate understanding of the relationship between the debate and contemporary society. Keywords: American psychology; critical-historical; indigenous psychology; relevance debate; social upheaval; South African psychology Background The relevance debate in psychology is frequently articulated in terms of a purported need for the discipline to become more socially valuable to the people who supposedly need it (Ahmed & Pillay, 2004; de la Rey & Ipser, 2004). This paper seeks to provide an alternative to the intradisciplinary perspective typically adopted within psychology, by examining the relevance debate from a socio- historical perspective. An historical outlook allows a more critical and accurate understanding of the role played by relevance discourse in society by challenging implicit assumptions within the rele- vance debate that can be obscured by its ahistorical presentation (Louw, 2002; Rose, 1996). The following literature review demonstrates that the requisite historicisation of the relevance debate has been largely neglected. It entails, first of all, an attempt to define the relevance debate. Second, examples of relevance discourse are provided both internationally and within South Africa. Third, it is argued that the relevance debate has an historical dimension. And fourth, it is asserted that this dimension is typically disregarded in debates about relevance. By contextualising relevance discourse, this paper attempts to determine the nature of the social contexts to which relevance discourse has been linked historically, thereby providing an account of its socio-historical antecedents (Louw, 2002). Defining the relevance debate “Relevance” is a term that has been used to call for changes within psychology, in order to make the discipline more responsive to social issues (Seedat, MacKenzie, & Stevens, 2004). In broad terms, relevance discourse suggests ways of making psychological services, research and knowledge more pertinent and applicable to pressing social concerns (de la Rey & Ipser, 2004). The “relevance debate” can therefore be imagined as involving deliberations on the social (ir)relevance of the disci- pline and on how best to maximise the discipline’s social utility (Macleod, 2004). Despite the umbrella-term of “relevance”, which is used to describe all calls for psychology to become socially valuable, the relevance debate encompasses an intricate and multidimensional set of arguments,