Editors had stripped the study’s socio-political analysis down to psychology alone

Evidence

I most seriously object to these “Conclusions.” These pages show the transformation the study has undergone from a socio-political to a purely psychological one. In the present version, there cannot be any such old-fashioned remarks as to “danger signals,” need for education, and any reference to “American Labor” is outright ludicrous. The American labor that appears in part I of the present study is anti-Semitic. — Martin Jay, The Dialectical Imagination, 676

Categorization

• XREF: Connects to Horkheimer and Adorno’s ‘Dialectic of Enlightenment’ critique of instrumental reason, which also tended toward psychological rather than socio-political explanation. — connects to: Prejudice research cannot be reduced to individual psychology — Cristian Tileagă, The Nature of Prejudice: Society,…, 737; The study’s character types were built from political doctrines, not psychology. — Rolf Wiggershaus, The Frankfurt School: Its History,…, 705
• DEFINE: Shows Massing drawing the boundary between socio-political and psychological modes of explanation of anti-Semitism — a core methodological tension of the whole Institute.

Broader Connections

• Prejudice research cannot be reduced to individual psychology #corroborates (0.88) — Cristian Tileagă, The Nature of Prejudice, 737