Register
A register of the work that made mass persuasion a thinkable object — from the discovery of the crowd to self-categorisation theory.
The institute publishes this register because its own object is not an invention of the present. What a society believes about itself, and what it believes others believe, has been worked on for more than a century — under the names of crowd psychology, public opinion, propaganda analysis, critical theory and experimental social psychology.
Each entry names the concept the field inherits from it. This is a map of a field, not a reading list and not a bibliography.
5
The generation that discovered the crowd as a psychological object. Suggestion, imitation and the dissolution of the individual in the group passed directly from here into practice.
7
Those who turned crowd theory into a profession — and their first critics. The manufacture of consent, the pseudo-event and the hidden persuaders belong to this line.
13
The empirical programme that made propaganda measurable: content analysis, panel studies, laboratory experiments — and the medium-centred counter-current from Toronto.
8
The European tradition that read propaganda not as a deviation but as the normal working of the technological and cultural order.
10
Those who worked out what the totalitarian regime does to language — through testimony, philology and wartime intelligence analysis — and the practitioners they studied.
8
The line that construes the leader–mass bond as a libidinal structure; it runs from Freud to the theory of chosen trauma and large-group identity.
13
The section in which persuasion, obedience, conformity and group identity were tested in the laboratory and the field — the scientific counterpart of the “brainwashing” debate.
Seven schools, one defining work for each entry. A canon is always a claim about what counts; this one is the institute's, and it can be contested on the record.
Where a text has several dates — written in prison and printed later, or published in French before German — the first actual publication is used.
Two entries are in the literature as the studied party rather than as theorists. They carry a practitioner tag; the distinction matters when the register is cited.
It ends where the institute's own question begins. Pluralistic ignorance and the spiral of silence are not in it — that gap is the reason the institute exists, and is set out on the institute page.
Names, dates and titles are language-independent and reproduced as published; school descriptions and the inherited concept are given in the language of this page.