Conversation Analysis and Psychotherapeutic Change

  • Liisa Voutilainen
  • Federico Rossano
  • Anssi Peräkylä
Chapter

Abstract

Psychotherapy is geared to facilitate change. Many types of psychotherapy aim to increase the clients’ contact with their problematic experiences that have been previously vaguely known or avoided. The chapter discusses how conversation analysis (CA) can be used to describe such psychotherapeutic process. Based on the authors’ research on cognitive therapy, systemic therapy and psychoanalysis, it is shown that implicit and explicit orientation to longitudinal development of themes that are worked within the therapy relates to sequential contexts in which they are discussed; the process in which the content of a problematic experience becomes more salient in the interaction unfolds in changing relations between the participants’ actions. The chapter introduces the notion of a ‘focal sequence’ as a point of departure for the investigation of such processes.

References

  1. Bercelli, F., Rossano, F., & Viaro, M. (2008). Clients’ responses to therapists’ re-interpretations. In A. Peräkylä, C. Antaki, S. Vehviläinen, & I. Leudar (Eds.), Conversation analysis and psychotherapy (pp. 43–62). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bercelli, F., Rossano, F., & Viaro, M. (2013). Supra-session courses of action in psychotherapy. Journal of Pragmatics, 57, 118–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Fonagy, P., Gergely, G., Jurist, E., & Target, M. (2002). Affect regulation, mentalization and the development of the self. New York: Other Press.Google Scholar
  4. Levinson, S. C. (2012). Action formation and ascription. In T. Stivers & J. Sidnell (Eds.), The handbook of conversation analysis (pp. 103–130). Wiley-Blackwell: Malden.Google Scholar
  5. Martin, C. (2004). From other to self: Learning as interactional change. Uppsala: Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis.Google Scholar
  6. Melander, H., & Sahlström, F. (2009). In tow of the blue whale: Learning as interactional changes in topical orientation. Journal of Pragmatics, 41(8), 1519–1537.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Mondada, L., & Pekarek Doehler, S. (2004). Second language acquisition as situated practice: Task accomplishment in the French second language classroom. The Modern Language Journal, 88(4), 501–518.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Muntigl, P. (2013). Resistance in couples counselling: Sequences of talk that disrupt progressivity and promote disaffiliation. Journal of Pragmatics, 49(1), 18–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Norcross, J. C., & Goldried, M. R. (Eds.). (2005). Handbook of psychotherapy integration. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Peräkylä, A. (2004). Making links in psychoanalytic interpretations: A conversation analytic view. Psychotherapy Research, 14(3), 289–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Peräkylä, A. (2005). Patients’ responses to interpretations: A dialogue between conversation analysis and psychoanalytic theory. Communication & Medicine, 2(2), 163–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Peräkylä, A. (2011). After interpretation: Third position utterances in psychoanalysis. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 44(3), 288–316.Google Scholar
  13. Peräkylä, A. (2012). Die Interaktionsgeschichte einer Deutung. In R. Ayass & C. Meyer (Eds.), Sozialität in Slow Motion: Theoretische und empirische Perspektiven (pp. 375–405). Wiesbaden: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Pomerantz, A. (1986). Extreme case formulations: A way of legitimizing claims. Human Studies, 9(2–3), 219–229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Sacks, H. (1992). Lectures on conversation I-II. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  16. Schegloff, E. A. (2007). Sequence organization in interaction: A primer in conversation analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Stiles, W. B. (2002). Assimilation of problematic experiences. In J. C. Norcross (Ed.), Psychotherapy relationships that work: Therapist contributions and responsiveness to patients (pp. 357–365). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  18. Stiles, W. B., Elliott, R., Llewelyn, S. P., Firth-Cozens, J. A., Margison, F. R., Shapiro, D. A., & Hardy, G. (1990). Assimilation of problematic experiences by clients in psychotherapy. Psychotherapy, 27(3), 411–420.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Vehviläinen, S. (2003). Preparing and delivering interpretations in psychoanalytic interaction. Text, 23(4), 573–606.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Voutilainen, L., Peräkylä, A., & Ruusuvuori, J. (2011). Therapeutic change in interaction: Conversation analysis of a transforming sequence. Psychotherapy Research, 21(3), 348–365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Liisa Voutilainen
    • 1
  • Federico Rossano
    • 2
  • Anssi Peräkylä
    • 1
  1. 1.University of HelsinkiHelsinkiFinland
  2. 2.University of California-San DiegoLa JollaUSA

Personalised recommendations