Non-Transformative Social Interaction

  • Alex Gillespie


How do people protect themselves from being transformed or changed through social interaction? While we often assume that changes brought about through social interaction are positive, leading to human and societal development, it is also the case that people can feel threatened and thus resist change. Moreover, in contemporary societies, people are confronted by such a bewildering variety of perspectives that one could argue that stability is more of a problem for research than change itself (Gergen, 1991; Grossen et al., 2011). The aim of this chapter is to analyse the semiotic mechanics of resisting the transformative potential of social interaction.


Social Representation Asylum Seeker Adaptive Immune System Transformative Potential Intergroup Contact 
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.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Andreouli, E. (2013). Identity and acculturation: The case of naturalised citizens in Britain. Culture & Psychology, 19, 165–183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Allport, G. (1954). The nature of prejudice. Cambridge, MA: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
  3. Bauer, M. W. & Gaskell, G. (1999). Towards a paradigm for research on social representations. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 29, 163–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Blum er, H. (1969). Symbolic interactionism. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  5. Brewer, M. B. (1996). When contact is not enough: Social identity and intergroup cooperation. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 20, 291–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cooper, M., Chak, A., Cornish, R & Gillespie, A. (2012). Dialogue: Bridging personal, community, and social transformation. Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 53, 70–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cornish, F. & Gillespie, A. (2009). A pragmatist approach to the problem of knowledge in health psychology. Journal of Health Psychology, 14(6), 800–809.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Coudin, G. (2013). The breakdown of the hegemonic representation of madness in Africa. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 43, 23–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Duveen, G. & Lloyd, B. (1990). Introduction. In G. Duveen & B. Lloyd (Eds.), Social representations and the development of knowledge (pp. 1–10). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Farr, R. (1997). The significance of the skin as a natural boundary in the sub-division of psychology. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 27, 305–323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Farr, R. M. (1996). The roots of modern social psychology: 1874–1954. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  12. Gergen, K. (1973). Social psychology as history. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 26, 309–320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Gergen, K. (1991). The saturated self: Dilemmas of identity in contemporary life. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  14. Gergen, K. J. (2014). From mhroring to world-making: Research as future forming. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, doi: 10.1111/ jtsb.12075.Google Scholar
  15. Gillespie, A. (2007). The intersubjective dynamics of trust, distrust and manipulation. In I. Markovâ & A. Gillespie (Eds.), Trust and distrust: Sociocultural perspectives (pp. 131–152). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.Google Scholar
  16. Gillespie, A. (2008). Social representations, alternative representations and semantic baniers. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 38, 375–391.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Gillespie, A. (2012). Contact without transformation: The context, process and content of distrust. In I. Markova & A. Gillespie (Eds.), Trust and conflict: Representation, culture and dialogue (pp. 201–216). London, UK: Routledge.Google Scholar
  18. Gillespie, A., Kadianaki, I. & O’Sullivan-Lago, R. (2012). Encountering alterity: Geographic and semantic movements. In Jaan Valsiner (Ed.), Oxford handbook of culture and psychology (pp. 695–709). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Grossen, M. & Salazar Orvig, A. (2011). Dialogism and dialogicality in the study of the self. Culture & Psychology, 17(4), 491–509.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hewstone, M. & Brown, R. (1986). Contact is not enough: An intergroup perspective on the “contact hypothesis.”In M. Hewstone & R. Brown (Eds.), Contact and conflict in intergroup encounters (pp. 1–44). Oxford, UK: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  21. Howarth, C. (2006). A social representation is not a quiet thing: Exploring the critical potential of social representations theory. British Journal of Social Psychology, 45(1), 65–86.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Ichheiser, G. (1943). Structure and dynamics of interpersonal relations. American Sociological Review, 8, 302–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Kadianaki, I. (2014). The transformative effects of stigma: Coping strategies as meaning-making efforts for immigrants living in Greece. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology, 24, 125–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Koffka, K. (1935). Principles of gestalt psychology. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul Ltd.Google Scholar
  25. Kus, L., Liu, J. & Ward, C. (2013). Relative deprivation versus system justification: Polemical social representations and identity positioning in a post-Soviet society. European Journal of Social Psychology, 43, 423–437.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Laing, R. D., Phillipson, H. & Lee, A. R. (1966). Interpersonal perception: A theory and method of research. London: Tavistock Publications.Google Scholar
  27. Levinas, E. (1991). On thinking-of-the-other: Entre nous. London: The Athlone Press Ltd.Google Scholar
  28. Linell, P. (2009). Rethinking language, mind, and world dialogically: Interactional and contextual theories of human sense-making. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.Google Scholar
  29. Marko va, I. & Gillespie, A. (Eds.) (2012). Trust and conflict: representation, culture and dialogue. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  30. McGuire, W.J. (1961). The effectiveness of supportive and refutational defenses in immunizing and restoring beliefs against persuasion. Sociometry, 24, 184–197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. McGuire, W.J. & Papageorgis, D. (1962). Effectiveness of forewarning in developing resistance to persuasion. The Public Opinion Quarterly, 26, 24–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Moscovici, S. (1976/2008). Psychoanalysis: Its image and its public. Cambridge: Polity.Google Scholar
  33. Moscovici, S. (1984). The phenomenon of social representations. In R. Farr & S. Moscovici (Eds.), Social representations (pp. 3–69). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  34. Nasie, M., Bar-Tal, D., Pliskin, R., Nahhas, E. & Halperin, E. (2014). Overcoming the barrier of narrative adherence in conflicts through awareness of the psychological bias of naïve realism. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, doi: 10.1177/0146167214551153.Google Scholar
  35. Newell, A. (1973). You can’t play 20 questions with nature and win: Projective comments on the papers of this symposium. In W. G. Chase (Ed.), Visual information processing (pp. 1–26). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  36. O’Sullivan-Lago, R. (2009). The Dialogical Self in a Cultural Contact Zone: The Impact of Cultural Continuity. PhD thesis, Department of Psycholog)’’, Oxford Brookes University.Google Scholar
  37. Papastamou, S. (1986). Psychologization and processes of minority and majority influence. European Journal of Social Psychology, 16(2), 165–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Pettigrew, T. F. (1998). Intergroup contact theory. A nnual Review of Psychology, 49, 65–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Pettigrew, T. F. & Tropp, L. R. (2006). A meta-analytic test of intergroup contact theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90, 751.Google Scholar
  40. Pfau, M., Kenski, H. C., Nitz, M. & Sorenson, J. (1990). Efficacy of inoculation strategies in promoting resistance to political attack messages: Application to direct mail. Communication Monographs, 57, 1–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Psaltis, C. (2011). Intergroup trust and contact in transition: A social representations perspective on the Cyprus conflict. In Ivana Marková and Alex Gillespie (Eds.), Trust and conflict: Representation, culture and dialogue (pp. 83–104). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  42. Raudsepp, M. & Wagner, W. (2011). The essentially other: Representational processes that divide groups. In Ivana Mark ova and Alex Gillespie (Eds.), Trust and conflict: Representation, culture and dialogue (pp. 105–122). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  43. Rothbart, M. &John, O. P. (1985). Social categorization and behavioral episodes: A cognitive analysis of the effects of intergroup contact. Journal of Social Issues, 41(3), 81–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Sammut, G. & Sartawi, M. (2012). Perspective-taking and the attribution of ignorance. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 42, 181–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Sammut, G., Clark, M. & Kissaun, G. D. (2014). Clark, M. and Kissaun, G. D. (2014), Dialogue, linguistic hinges and semantic barriers: Social psychological uses and functions of a vulgar term. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 44(3), 326–346.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Sherif, M. (1958). Superordinate goals in the reduction of intergroup conflict. American Journal of Sociology, 63(4), 349–356.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Tajfel, H. (1957). Value and the perceptual judgment of magnitude. Psychological Review, 64, 192–204.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. Thomas, W. (1928). The methodology of behaviour study. In W. I. Thomas and D. S. Thomas (Eds), The child in America: Behaviour problems and programs (pp. 553–576). New York: Alfred A. Knopf.Google Scholar
  49. Valsiner, J. (2002). Forms of dialogical relations and semiotic autoregulation within the self. Theory & Psychology, 12, 251–265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Valsiner, J. (1998). The guided mind. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  51. Valsiner, J. (2011). The dynamics of trust and non-trust. In Ivana Markova and Alex Gillespie (Eds.), Trust and conflict: Representation, culture and dialogue (pp. 49–69). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  52. Wagner, U. & Machleit, U. (1986). Gastarbeiter in the Federal Republic of Germany: Contact between Germans and migrant populations. In M. Hewstone & R. Brown (Eds.), Contact and conflict in intergroup encounters (pp. 59–78). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  53. Zittoun, T. (2006). Transitions: Development through symbolic resources. Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Alex Gillespie 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Alex Gillespie

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations