William Wishart Biddle (June 19, 1900 – February 1973) was an American social scientist and a major contributor to the study of community development. Although details of his personal life are rare in written records, he made contributions to the field of psychology by developing frameworks in propaganda, education, and community development. Biddle outlined in his writings that propaganda was a form of persuasion for coercing people, illustrating examples from times of war. He established that education systems should develop each individual's intelligence and focus on critical thinking to avoid autistic thinking. Biddle defined and established various community development programs with a focus on environment, descriptive studies, politics, religion, and educational process.
There are several noted achievements in his lifetime. His 1931 article "A Psychological Definition of Propaganda" was one of the early psychological works on the subject of propaganda. He was one of the earliest practitioners of community development in the United States. His book The Community Development Process, written in collaboration with his wife Loureide J. Biddle, was translated into several languages.
His written work was consistent with the traditional American values of self help, fair play, and cooperation within the community. For several years, he directed a program at Earlham College known as Community Dynamics.
Contributions to Psychology
Work on Propaganda
Biddle was one of the earliest practitioners of developing psychological frameworks for propaganda. He illustrated that propaganda is an understated form of persuasion that utilizes multiple methodologies of coercing people. These methods include: persuasion by way of regulating people’s ideas through rational arguments; appealing to emotion through the use of sentiments and ideas pertaining to emotion; direct suggestion through using repetition in slogans or phrases; and indirectly appealing to emotion through cloaking propaganda as entertainment or news media coverage. He emphasized the importance of the propagandist being hidden when conveying their messages. Whenever a propagandist is unable to keep themselves hidden, the focus of attention on the propaganda will start to shift towards the emotional ideas and desired conduct of the perceiver through the use of direct suggestions.
Propaganda during war
Periods of war are often littered with all sorts of propaganda. Biddle articulated that during times of war, propaganda can be used to uphold attitudes and morale in favour of “our side” versus the “enemy.” During times of war, propaganda would gradually become more compelling to observers. With this, there were four standard rules that were created for the use of propaganda during war times. The first rule was that propaganda should try to avoid argumentation and should instead apply to specific emotions. The second rule was that propaganda should aim to fit certain situations into the arrangement of “us” versus “the enemy.” The third rule states that propaganda should motion to apply to certain social groups and not just individuals. The fourth rule highlights the importance of hiding the propagandist from the public. While there has been confusion as to the proper formation of the rules, the second rule is most often well-agreed upon.
Propaganda after war
After wars have concluded, propaganda still has lasting effects. Biddle demonstrated that during these periods, propaganda would put special emphasis on appealing to emotional themes and motifs in order to avert past the logical, thought-provoking arguments created from using propaganda. He detailed two types of emotional responses associated with propaganda: positive and negative. The importance of conveying a radical version of these emotional responses was explained as well. The propagandist should either convey a strong positive response to elicit feelings of enjoyment, enthusiasm, and love; or they should aim to convey a strong negative response to evoke feelings of avoidance, fear, and dislike. The process of conveying these emotions through propaganda works to separate those in favor from those against the subject of the propaganda.
Differentiating the “enemy” from “we,” a blockage associated with negativism and distrust is created that makes it more difficult to accept facts stemming from the “enemy,” regardless of how rational or logical an argument may be. Biddle simply put this phenomenon as a tendency to believe that there is always an opposing force that has views directly averse to that of “we.”