Grasping the Dynamic Nature of Intersubjectivity

  • Sergio Salvatore
  • Rosapia Lauro-Grotto
  • Alessandro Gennaro
  • Omar Gelo


The acknowledgement of the dynamicity of psychological phenomena ®has been progressively gaining acceptance in various branches of psychology. In some of these areas (first of all the neurosciences, psycholinguistic, but also cognitive psychology, and social psychology) the theory has greatly benefited from the adoption of conceptual models and methods of investigation provided by the Dynamic Systems theory (inter alia, Salvatore, Tebaldi, & Potì, 2008). However, in other fields of psychology, authors refer to the dynamic systems in metaphorical terms, using it as a striking image to describe the irreversibility and intrinsic creativity/autonomy of the psychological phenomena under investigation. As a result of this rhetorical strategy, in various areas related to the study of intersubjectivity (work psychology, clinical, and psychodynamic psychology as well as cultural psychology and at least partially developmental psychology) there is an evident gap between the conceptualisation of the phenomena as dynamic and the empirical investigation of it as a “static” process (Lauro-Grotto, Salvatore, Gennaro, & Gelo, 2009—Chapter 1 in this book).


Dynamic System Theory Multiple Correspondence Analysis Psychological Phenomenon Temporal Contiguity Temporal Trajectory 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.



We wish to thank the participants in the session of the Clark University’s Kitchen Seminar (10th of September, 2008) devoted to the discussion of a first draft of this text. The discussion that developed there provided meaningful feedback, helping us to bring the implications of our proposal into focus.


  1. Bakeman, R., & Gottman, J. M. (1997). Observing interaction. An introduction to sequential analysis (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambribge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Barkham, M., Stiles, W. B., & Shapiro, D. A. (1993). The shape of change in psychotherapy: Longitudinal assessment of personal problems. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 61, 667–677.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Borckardt, J. J., et al. (2008). Clinical practice as natural laboratory for psychotherapy research. A guide to case based time-series analysis. American Psychologist, 63(2), 77–95.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Gennaro, A., Salvatore, S., Lis, A., & Salcuni, S. (2008, June 18–22). Looking at the psychotherapy process as an intersubjective dynamic of sensemaking. Paper presented at the 39th Annual Meeting of the Society of Psychotherapy Research Barcelona, Spain.Google Scholar
  5. Grassi, R. (2008). Validazione di un modello di analisi delle narrazioni attraverso uno studio idiografico. L’Analisi Frastica Multidimensionale (AFM) [Validation of a model of narrative analysis. An idiographic study with the Multidimensional Utterance Analysis]. Ph.D dissertation, University of Salento—Lecce.Google Scholar
  6. Herzberg, F., Mausner, B., & Snyderman, B. B. (1959). The motivation to work (2nd ed.). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  7. Hoffman, I. Z. (1998). Ritual and spontaneity in the psychoanalytic process. Hillsdale, NJ: The Analytic Press Inc.Google Scholar
  8. Krause, M. S., Howard, K. I., & Lutz, W. (1998). Exploring individual change. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 66, 838–845.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Lambert, M. J. (Ed.). (2004). Bergin and Garfield’s handbook of psychotherapy and behavior change (5th ed.). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  10. Lancia, F. (2002). The logic of a textscope. Retrieved August 18, 2007, from
  11. Lancia, F. (2010 forthcoming). Word co-occurrence and similarity in meaning. In S. Salvatore & J. Valsiner (Eds.), Mind as infinite dimensionality. Roma: Firera Publishing Group.Google Scholar
  12. Langs, R. (1974). The technique of psychoanalytic psychotherapy. New York: Jason Aronson, Inc.Google Scholar
  13. Laurenceau, J. P., Hayes, A. M., & Feldman, G. C. (2007). Statistical and methodological issues in the study of change in psychotherapy. Clinical Psychology Review, 27, 715–723.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Lauro-Grotto, R. P., Salvatore, S., Gennaro, A., & Gelo O. (2009). The unbearable dynamicity of psychological processes: Highlights of the psychodynamic theories. In J. Valsiner, P. Molenaar, M. Lyra, & N. Chaudhary (Eds.), Dynamics process methodology in the social and developmental sciences (pp. 1–30). New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  15. Mahoney, M. J. (1991). Human change processes. The scientific foundations of psychotherapy. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  16. Maruyama, M. (1999). Heterogram analysis: Where the assumption of normal distribution is illogical. Human Systems Management, 18, 53–60.Google Scholar
  17. Mergenthaler, E. (1996). Emotion abstraction patterns in verbatim protocols: A new way of describing therapeutic processes. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 64, 1306–1318.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Molenaar, P. C. M., & Valsiner, J. (2005). How generalization works through the single case. A simple idiographic process analysis of an individual psychotherapy. International Journal of Idiographic Science. (Reprinted in S. Salvatore et al. (2009). Yearbook of idiographic science 2008. (Vol. 1). Rome: G Fireira Group)Google Scholar
  19. Nightingale, D. J., & Cromby, J. (Eds.). (1999). Social constructionist psychology. A critical analysis of theory and practice. Buckingham: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Osgood, C. E., Suci, G. J., & Tannenbaum, T. H. (1957). The measurement of meaning. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
  21. Salvatore, S., Gelo, O., Gennaro, A., Manzo, S., & Al-Radaideh, A. (in press). Looking at the psychotherapy process as an intersubjective dynamics of meaning making. A case study with Discourse Flow Analysis.Google Scholar
  22. Salvatore, S., Lis, A., Salcuni, S., Serio, A. V., Gennaro, A., Mossi, P. et al. (2006, September 28–October 1). Confronto tra studio delle difese e della dinamica discorsiva nell’analisi del processo terapeutico. Studio di un caso [Comparison of defense mechanisms and discursive dynamics in the therapeutic process. A case study]. Paper presented at the 6th Annual Meeting of the Italian Chapter of the Society of Psychotherapy Research. Reggio Calabria, Italy.Google Scholar
  23. Salvatore, S., Tebaldi, C., & Potì, S. (2008). The discoursive dynamic of sensemaking. In S. Salvatore, J. Valsiner, S. Strout, & J. Clegg (Eds.), Yearbook of idiographic science 2008 (pp. 39–72). Rome: Firera Publishing Group.Google Scholar
  24. Salvatore, S., & Venuleo, C. (2009) The unconscious as source of sense: A psychodynamic approach to meaning. In B. Wagoner (Ed.), Symbolic transformations: The mind in movement through culture and society. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  25. Schaie, K. W., Willis, S. L., & Pennak, S. (2005). A historical framework for cohort differences in intelligence. Research in Human Development, 2,43–67.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Semerari, A., Carcione, A., Dimaggio, G., Falcone, M., Nicolo, G., Procacci, M., et al. (2003). Assessing problematic states inside patient’s narratives. The grid of problematic conditions. Psychotherapy Research, 13(3), 337–353.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. TLAB—Tools for text analysis. By T-LAB® di Lancia Franco. Retrieved August 10, 2007, from
  28. Toomela, A. (2008). Variables in psychology: A critique of quantitative psychology. Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science, 42(3), 245–265.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Toomela, A. (2009). How methodology became a toolbox—and how it escapes from that box. In J. Valsiner, P. C. M. Moolenar, M. C. D. P. Lyra, & N. Chaudhary (Eds.), Dynamic process methodology in the social and developmental sciences (pp. 45–66). New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  30. Tschacher, W., Schiepek, G., & Brummer, E. J. (Eds.). (1992). Self-organization and clinical psychology. Empirical approaches to synergetics in psychology. Berlin: Springer Verlag.Google Scholar
  31. Valsiner, J., Salvatore, S., Strout, S., & Clegg, J. (Eds.). (2009). Yearbook of idiographic science 2008 (Vol. 1). Rome: Firera Publishing Group.Google Scholar
  32. Venuleo, C., & Salvatore, S. (2006). Linguaggi e dispositivi comunicativi. I Faccia a Faccia televisivi [Languages and communication devices. Face to face television debates]. In S. Cristante, & P. Mele (Eds.), Da Vendola a Prodi. I media nelle campagne elettorali 2005–2006 (pp. 151–189). Nardò, LE: Besa Editrice.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sergio Salvatore
    • 1
  • Rosapia Lauro-Grotto
  • Alessandro Gennaro
  • Omar Gelo
  1. 1.Department of Educational, Psychological and Teaching ScienceUniversity of SalentoLecceItaly

Personalised recommendations