Advertisement

Psychosocial Studies und Kritische Narrative Analyse

  • Stephen Frosh
  • Peter Emerson
Chapter

Zusammenfassung

Stephen Frosh und Peter Emerson führen in ihrem Beitrag in die von ihnen selbst entwickelte Kritische Narrative Analyse ein. Sie verorten diese Methode im Feld der britischen psychosocial studies, das die scheinbaren Gegensätze von Individuum und Gesellschaft, Psychologie und Soziologie transzendiert und den Blick auf das ‚Dazwischen‘ – das Psychosoziale – richtet. Im Gegensatz zu anderen Ansätzen der psychologischen Narrationsforschung versucht die Kritische Narrative Analyse „dem Sog des Psychologischen zu widerstehen – der durch die Ideologie des Individualismus gestützten Tendenz, psychosoziale Ereignisse als rein psychologische zu behandeln“. Stattdessen soll das Gesellschaftliche im scheinbar Psychologischen exploriert werden, was sie anhand eines Beispiels aus einer umfassenden Studie zu Jugendlichen, die einen Missbrauch an Kindern begangen haben, erläutern. Dabei gelingt es ihnen zu zeigen, wie in den detaillierten Narrationen eines Einzelnen, die Produktivität des Gesellschaftlichen – hier: hegemonialer Männlichkeitsdiskurse – am Werk ist, ohne sich bloß durch die Subjekte hindurch umzusetzen.

Schlüsselwörter

Kritische Narrative Analyse psychosocial studies Kohärenz accountability Geschlecht Männlichkeiten 

Literatur

  1. Andrews, M., Squire, C., & Tamboukou, M. (Hrsg.). (2008). Doing narrative research. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  2. Bruner, J. S. (1990). Acts of meaning. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Burck, C. (2007). Book Reviews – Emerson and Frosh, Critical Narrative Analysis. Journal of Family Therapy, 29, 289–291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Burman, E. (2007). Deconstructing developmental psychology. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  5. Burman, E. (2008). Resisting the deradicalization of psychosocial analyses. Psychoanalysis, Culture and Society, 13, 374–378.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Edley, N., & Wetherell, M. (1997). Jockeying for position: The construction of masculine identities. Discourse and Society, 8(2), 203–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Emerson, P., & Frosh, S. (2001). Young masculinities and sexual abuse: Research contestations. International Journal of Critical Psychology, 3, 72–93.Google Scholar
  8. Emerson, P., & Frosh, S. (2004 [2009]). Critical narrative analysis in psychology (2. Aufl.). London: Palgrave.Google Scholar
  9. Frosh, S. (2007). Disintegrating qualitative research. Theory and Psychology, 17, 635–653.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Frosh, S., & Baraitser, L. (2008). Psychoanalysis and psychosocial studies. Psychoanalysis, Culture and Society, 13, 346–365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Gee, J. P. (1999). An introduction to discourse analysis: Theory and method. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  12. Henriques, J., Hollway, W., Urwin, C., Venn, C., & Walkerdine, V. (1998). Changing the subject (2. Aufl.). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  13. Henwood, K. L., & Pidgeon, N. F. (1992). Qualitative research and psychological theorising. British Journal of Psychology, 83, 97–111.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Hiles, D. R., & Cermak, I. (2008). Narrative Psychology. In C. Willig & W. Stainton-Rogers (Hrsg.), The handbook of qualitative methods in psychology. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  15. Hoggett, P. (2008). Relational thinking and welfare practice. In S. Clarke, H. Hahn, & P. Hoggett (Hrsg.), Object relations and social relations (S. 65–85). London: Karnac.Google Scholar
  16. Hook, D. (2008). Articulations between psychoanalysis and psychosocial studies: Limitations and possibilities. Psychoanalysis, Culture and Society, 13, 397–405.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Jefferson, T. (2008). What is ‘the psychosocial’: A response to frosh and baraitser. Psychoanalysis, Culture and Society, 13, 366–373.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kuhn, T. (1970). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
  19. MacLeod, M., & Saraga, E. (1988). Challenging the orthodoxy: Towards a feminist theory and practice. Feminist Review, 28, 16–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Manning, P. K., & Cullum-Swan, B. (1994). Narrative, content and semiotic analysis. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Hrsg.), Handbook of qualitative research. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  21. McNamee, S. (1993). Research as conversation. Plenary, conference on constructed realities: Therapy, theory, and research. Lofoten, NorwayGoogle Scholar
  22. Mishler, E. G. (1986). Research interviewing: Context and narrative. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  23. Mishler, E. G. (1991). Representing discourse: The rhetoric of transcription. Journal of Narrative and Life History, 1, 255–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Mishler, E. G. (1995). Models of narrative analysis: A typology. Journal of Narrative and Life History, 5, 87–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Mishler, E. G. (1996). Missing Persons: Recovering developmental stories/histories. In R. Jessor, A. Colby, & R. A. Shweder (Hrsg.), Ethnography and human development: Context and meaning in social enquiry. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  26. Mishler, E. G. (2006). Narrative and identity: The double arrow of time. In A. De Fina, D. Schiffrin, & M. Bamberg (Hrsg.), Discourse and identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  27. Parker, I. (2005). Lacanian discourse analysis in psychology: Seven theoretical elements. Theory and Psychology, 15, 163–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Potter, J., & Hepburn, A. (2005). Qualitative interviews in psychology: Problems and possibilities. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 2, 281–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Reinharz, S. (1992). Feminist methods in social research. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  30. Riessman, C. K. (Hrsg.). (1994). Qualitative studies in social work research. Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  31. Riessman, C. K. (2008). Narrative methods in the human sciences. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  32. Riessman, C. K., & Quinney, L. (2005). Narrative in social work: A critical review. Qualitative Social Work, 4(4), 391–412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Rose, N. (1999). Governing the soul – the shaping of the private self. London: Free Association Books.Google Scholar
  34. Ryan, G., & Lane, S. (Hrsg.). (1997). Juvenile sexual offending. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.Google Scholar
  35. Schiff, B., & Cohler, B. (2001). Telling survival backward: Holocaust survivors narrate the past. In G. M. Kenyon, P. G. Clark, & B. de Vries (Hrsg.), Narrative gerontology: Theory, research and practice (S. 113–136). New York, NY: Springer.Google Scholar
  36. Walkerdine, V. (2008). Contextualizing debates about psychosocial studies. Psychoanalysis, Culture and Society, 13, 341–345.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Wetherell, M. (2003). Paranoia, ambivalence, and discursive practices: Concepts of position and positioning in psychoanalysis and discursive psychology. In R. Harre & F. Moghaddam (Hrsg.), The self and others: Positioning individuals and groups in personal, political, and cultural Contexts. Westport, CT: Praeger.Google Scholar
  38. Wetherell, M. (2005). Unconscious conflict or everyday accountability? British Journal of Social Psychology, 44, 169–173.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. Wetherell, M. (2008). Subjectivity or psychodiscursive practices? Investigating complex intersectional identities. Subjectivity, 22, 73–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of LondonLondonUK
  2. 2.NorwichUK

Personalised recommendations