Contrasts and synergies: A comment on Jones (2022)

IF 1.1 4区 心理学 Q3 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Vivien Burr, N. King
{"title":"Contrasts and synergies: A comment on Jones (2022)","authors":"Vivien Burr, N. King","doi":"10.1177/09593543221106440","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In response to Jones’s (2022) article, we argue that if we understand personal construct psychology as being less rationalistic and more holistic than is often assumed, important synergies between it and Jungian analytical psychology can be observed. We argue that the two theories can be considered to align with each other on a number of points. These include taking a similar epistemological position, a recognition of psychological processes operating outside of immediate awareness, and the implications that these can have for personal change. We argue for a more “social” understanding of personal construct psychology than Jones allows for, and further suggest that possibilities for its alignment with social constructionism should not be understated. We conclude that both theories deserve greater visibility in the world of academic psychology, and argue for greater consideration of their potential use in research.","PeriodicalId":47640,"journal":{"name":"Theory & Psychology","volume":"32 1","pages":"651 - 657"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Theory & Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09593543221106440","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

In response to Jones’s (2022) article, we argue that if we understand personal construct psychology as being less rationalistic and more holistic than is often assumed, important synergies between it and Jungian analytical psychology can be observed. We argue that the two theories can be considered to align with each other on a number of points. These include taking a similar epistemological position, a recognition of psychological processes operating outside of immediate awareness, and the implications that these can have for personal change. We argue for a more “social” understanding of personal construct psychology than Jones allows for, and further suggest that possibilities for its alignment with social constructionism should not be understated. We conclude that both theories deserve greater visibility in the world of academic psychology, and argue for greater consideration of their potential use in research.
对比与协同:评Jones(2022)
针对Jones(2022)的文章,我们认为,如果我们将个人建构心理学理解为比通常假设的更不理性、更全面,那么可以观察到它与荣格分析心理学之间的重要协同作用。我们认为,这两种理论可以被认为在许多方面是一致的。其中包括采取类似的认识论立场,承认在即时意识之外运作的心理过程,以及这些过程对个人变化的影响。我们主张对个人建构心理学有比Jones所允许的更“社会”的理解,并进一步建议不应低估其与社会建构主义相一致的可能性。我们得出的结论是,这两种理论都应该在学术心理学界得到更大的关注,并主张更多地考虑它们在研究中的潜在用途。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Theory & Psychology
Theory & Psychology PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
3.10
自引率
8.30%
发文量
43
期刊介绍: Theory & Psychology is a fully peer reviewed forum for theoretical and meta-theoretical analysis in psychology. It focuses on the emergent themes at the centre of contemporary psychological debate. Its principal aim is to foster theoretical dialogue and innovation within the discipline, serving an integrative role for a wide psychological audience. Theory & Psychology publishes scholarly and expository papers which explore significant theoretical developments within and across such specific sub-areas as: cognitive, social, personality, developmental, clinical, perceptual or biological psychology.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信