For much of its history, Psychology has relied heavily on theories and methods developed in Europe and North America. While these approaches have shaped the field in important ways, they do not always reflect the experiences, values, and cultural contexts of people in Southeast Asia. In a recent meeting report, Ting and colleagues (2024) describe the development of the Southeast Asian Indigenous Psychology (SEAIP) Network, a growing effort to address this gap. The report goes beyond summarizing a conference discussion and outlines ways of building a Psychology that is more closely connected to local knowledge, communities, and everyday realities.
Discussions about exploring local ways of understanding the mind, behaviour, and mental health have grown in recent years as scholars question whether psychological theories developed in Western countries can explain people’s experiences everywhere. The conference report highlights another important issue: not all Asian voices are equally represented in these discussions. Much of the work that challenges Western-dominated approaches to Psychology in Asia comes from countries like China, Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan. While this work has made important contributions, these countries have different histories and social contexts from many Southeast Asian countries, especially in relation to the effects of Western colonial rule, cultural differences, and diverse societies. As a result, Asia is often treated as a single region in Psychology, even though it contains many different histories and experiences. Some Asian countries have been more successful in developing and promoting Indigenous Psychology, while many Southeast Asian countries are still working to make their perspectives more visible.
The Emergence of the SEAIP Network
To address these concerns, the Southeast Asian Indigenous Psychology (SEAIP) Network was established in 2020. More than a research network, SEAIP seeks to create a space where psychologists across the region can learn from one another, develop culturally informed research and build a stronger collective voice within the discipline. The network also aims to ensure that perspectives from smaller and less represented Southeast Asian countries are included in conversations about the future of Psychology.
Four key priorities emerged from the meetings discussions of these challenges:
1. Building Fair and Inclusive International Partnerships:
International collaboration is often seen as a positive thing. However, the SEAIP participants suggest that working together does not automatically make research more equal. Instead of simply following the priorities of Euro-American psychologists, researchers in Southeast Asia should build partnerships that respond to local needs and concerns. The report also stresses the importance of involving Indigenous communities as active partners in research rather than treating them only as research participants.
Why this matters…
This recommendation is about more than improving research partnerships. It raises a larger question about who gets to shape knowledge and whose perspectives are considered important. For much of Psychology’s history, theories developed in Western countries have often been treated as universally relevant. The authors challenge this idea by arguing that researchers in Southeast Asia and Indigenous communities should have a greater role in deciding research questions, interpreting findings, and setting research priorities.
2. Promoting Decolonial Approaches to Psychology:
The report calls for psychologists to engage more seriously with local ways of understanding people, relationships, and well-being.
“Psychologists need to rely on the Indigenous/local worldviews to reconstruct and enrich the nuance of ‘collectivism’, for example, on family duties (ethics) and interconnectedness (e.g. kapwa—Filipino, gotong royong—Malays, Indonesians).”
They also encourage researchers to pay attention to local beliefs about spirituality, relationships with nature, healing traditions, and experiences of mental illness. They recommend research methods that fit local contexts, including storytelling, participatory approaches, and community-based research.
Why this matters…
At its core, this recommendation challenges the idea that psychological knowledge should mainly come from Western academic traditions. The authors argue that local concepts and experiences are not simply different versions of the same psychological processes. They can also offer new ways of understanding human behavior. In this sense, decolonization is not about rejecting Western psychology. It is about broadening Psychology by recognizing that useful knowledge exists in many different traditions.
3. Translating Research into Practice:
The authors argue that Indigenous Psychology in Southeast Asia should place greater emphasis on practical impact. Research should not only contribute to academic discussions but also help address problems that people face in their everyday lives, especially in low- and middle-income countries. They encourage researchers to turn their findings into practices that support mental health and well-being. Practitioners should understand how local communities make sense of illness, suffering, and healing, while also paying attention to broader social conditions that affect people’s lives.
Why this matters…
This recommendation reflects a view of Psychology that stays connected to people’s everyday experiences. Rather than seeing psychological problems only as individual issues, the authors encourage researchers and practitioners to consider the cultural, economic, and political conditions that shape people’s lives. The goal is to produce knowledge that is both meaningful to local communities and useful in practice.
4. Mentoring the Next Generation:
The report highlights the importance of supporting early-career researchers and preserving local knowledge traditions. Younger scholars need access to mentorship, funding, publication opportunities, and further education if Indigenous Psychology is to continue growing in the region.
Why this matters…
The authors see Indigenous Psychology as a long-term project rather than a passing trend. Building new theories, research methods, and knowledge traditions takes time and sustained support. Without mentorship and opportunities for younger scholars, these efforts may be difficult to maintain in the future.
The conference proposed four concrete strategies for moving forward with these:
1. Addressing Language Barriers and Improving Communication
Southeast Asia is home to many languages, dialects, and cultural traditions. Because of this diversity, researchers need to pay close attention to how people communicate, including local expressions, metaphors, symbols, and non-verbal forms of communication. The authors recommend involving community members or cultural informants who understand both local and mainstream languages and knowledge systems.
“Training translators and researchers in cultural competency could also enhance the accuracy of translations. Lastly, we could create a comprehensive glossary of cultural terms and expressions in both languages.”
Researchers can also consult community members to better understand the meanings behind particular words and expressions. They further suggest training translators and researchers in cultural competence and creating glossaries of important cultural terms. These recommendations recognize that language does more than communicate information. It also reflects how people understand themselves and the world around them. If researchers overlook these cultural meanings, they may misunderstand people’s experiences or miss important insights altogether.
2. Developing Indigenous Research Methods and Tools:
The authors argue that Indigenous Psychology needs research methods and tools that better reflect local realities. Psychological measures developed in Western contexts may not always capture the experiences, values, or ways of thinking that are important in Southeast Asian communities.
To address this, researchers should work closely with local communities when adapting existing instruments or developing new ones. The report suggests drawing on local sources such as literature, religious texts, films, social media, and everyday cultural practices to identify concepts that are meaningful within specific communities. These concepts can then be explored through larger studies and used to develop interventions, programs, and policies. More broadly, this proposal shifts attention from simply applying existing theories to generating new psychological knowledge from local contexts.
3. Working with Local Stakeholders
The report also highlights the importance of collaborating with local stakeholders, including community leaders, elders, traditional healers, and local organizations. Such partnerships can help ensure that research addresses issues that communities consider important and that interventions are appropriate for local contexts. Authors encourage greater collaboration between researchers, mental health professionals, and traditional healers when designing programs and services. For example, in communities where collective life is highly valued, group-based approaches may be more effective than interventions focused solely on individuals. This emphasis reflects a practical concern: research is more likely to be useful and sustainable when it is developed with communities rather than for them.
4. Increasing Young People’s Awareness of Local Knowledge:
The final action plan focuses on younger generations. The authors argue that Indigenous Psychology depends on maintaining strong connections to local knowledge and traditions. They therefore call for greater efforts to promote cultural education, strengthen communication between generations, and create opportunities for young people to engage with local knowledge.
“Addressing the need for more awareness among young people of local knowledge requires intentional efforts to promote cultural education, intergenerational communication and preserving traditional practices.”
Educational institutions can support this process by incorporating local knowledge into curriculum and creating spaces for cultural exchange. The report also encourages young scholars to participate in activities such as journal reviewing and conference organization, which can help them engage with broader academic communities while continuing to bring local perspectives into their work.
For the authors, supporting younger generations is essential for ensuring that Indigenous psychology remains a living and evolving field rather than a short-lived intellectual movement.
The discussion at SEAIP is a reminder that Psychology does not have to speak with just one voice. Some of its most valuable insights may come from listening to perspectives that have long been overlooked.
Researcher’s Contact Info: Rachel Sing- Kiat Ting, Department of Psychology, Monash University Malaysia, 47500 Selangor, Malaysia. Email: [email protected]
Boon- Ooi Lee, National Institute of Education, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore City, Singapore. Email: [email protected]
Ayushi Jolly
Ayushi Jolly is a PhD Scholar in Social Psychology at Jawaharlal Nehru University. Her research interests include Critical, Social, Indigenous, and Cultural Psychologies. Her research focuses on moving beyond individual focused explanations to understanding the self as embedded in dynamic social contexts.
Outside the academic sphere, she relishes the joy of travel and trekking and finds solace in mountains and the world of non-fiction.