Psychodynamics as a Case for Epistemic Hegemony in Mainstream Western Work and Organizational Psychology: A Documentary Analysis

Aim/Purpose This paper investigates the marginal presence of psychodynamic perspectives in contemporary Western Work and Organizational Psychology (W-WOP), addressing concerns that such approaches remain overlooked despite their relevance to understanding the emotional and unconscious dimensions of work. Background Drawing on a Critical Work and Organizational Psychology (CWOP) perspective, the study examines how epistemic norms and disciplinary assumptions shape the visibility of psychodynamics within mainstream scientific venues. Methodology A documentary analysis of the most recently available conference programs from EAWOP and SIOP was conducted. Titles, countries of origin, psychodynamic topics, and contribution types were extracted and analyzed descriptively using frequency counts. Contribution The paper empirically maps the representation of psychodynamic scholarship in two major W-WOP conferences and offers a critical interpretation of its marginalization through the lens of epistemic hegemony. As a key theoretical insight, it suggests that the marginalization of psychodynamic approaches reflects broader patterns of epistemic hegemony, whereby certain paradigms are privileged while others are systematically excluded, shaping what counts as legitimate knowledge. Findings Out of 2,620 reviewed contributions, only nine (0.34%) explicitly referenced psychodynamic approaches. These appeared mostly as low-visibility posters, covered fragmented topics, and originated from a small set of countries. No psychodynamic content was integrated into high-profile programme formats. Recommendations for Practitioners Practitioners are encouraged to incorporate psychodynamic concepts when addressing organizational issues related to emotion, conflict, identity, and other processes that may relate to unconscious phenomena. Recommendations for Researchers Researchers are urged to engage with psychodynamic frameworks to expand epistemic diversity and to critically reflect on dominant assumptions shaping what counts as legitimate knowledge in W-WOP. Impact on Society Broadening W-WOP’s epistemological horizons may enhance the discipline’s capacity to address complex forms of suffering, inequality, and emotional strain in contemporary workplaces. Future Research Further studies should examine publication patterns, editorial practices, and doctoral training to better understand the institutional mechanisms driving epistemic marginalization.