Qualitative Psychology最新文献

{"title":"Stability and change in narrative identity: Introduction to the special issue on repeated narration.","authors":"J. Adler","doi":"10.1037/QUP0000155","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1037/QUP0000155","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":37522,"journal":{"name":"Qualitative Psychology","volume":"25 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":8.5,"publicationDate":"2019-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"73394649","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Ghosts in the story: The role of audiences in stability and change in twice-told life stories.","authors":"M. Pasupathi, C. Wainryb","doi":"10.1037/QUP0000153","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1037/QUP0000153","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":37522,"journal":{"name":"Qualitative Psychology","volume":"6 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":8.5,"publicationDate":"2019-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"79688138","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Repetition is the scent of the hunt: A clinician’s application of narrative identity to a longitudinal life study.","authors":"J. Singer","doi":"10.1037/QUP0000149","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1037/QUP0000149","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":37522,"journal":{"name":"Qualitative Psychology","volume":"5 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":8.5,"publicationDate":"2019-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"90837842","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Rhetoric of derisive laughter in political debates on the EU.","authors":"Mirko A. Demasi, Cristian Tileagă","doi":"10.1037/QUP0000156","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1037/QUP0000156","url":null,"abstract":"This paper focuses on the argumentative role of derisive laughter in broadcast political debates. Using Discursive Psychology (DP) we analyse how politicians use derisive laughter as an argumentative resource in multi-party interactions, in the form of debates about the UK and the European Union. Specifically, we explore how both pro- and anti-EU politicians use derisive laughter to manage issues of who-knows-what and who-knows-better. We demonstrate the uses of derisive laughter by focusing on two discrete, yet pervasive, interactional phenomena in our data – extended laughter sequences and snorts. We argue that in the context of political debates derisive laughter does more than signal trouble and communicate contempt; it is, more than often, mobilized in the service of ideological argumentation and used as a form of challenge to factual claims.","PeriodicalId":37522,"journal":{"name":"Qualitative Psychology","volume":"54 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":8.5,"publicationDate":"2019-05-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"83331507","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Introduction to Special Section: Using Personal Documentary Sources in Psychological Research 1940–1970","authors":"V. Hevern","doi":"10.1037/QUP0000122","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1037/QUP0000122","url":null,"abstract":"This Special Section of Qualitative Psychology owes its origin to the comments of Fred Wertz in two forums. The first were his remarks at the opening session on “Qualitative Inquiry in Psychology Past, Present and Future” at the 1st Conference of the Society for Qualitative Inquiry in Psychology held on November 14, 2013 at the Graduate Center, CUNY. There Fred briefly summarized the historical roots of qualitative inquiry in psychology. His remarks later appeared in more extended form (Wertz, 2014) as the very first article in the first issue of this journal. His effort to provide an overview of the past in qualitative research is both modest in scope and, of necessity, limited in depth since, he argues, “despite the importance and ubiquity of qualitative inquiry, a comprehensive account of its history in psychology has not been written” (Wertz, 2014, Abstract). Indeed, only a restricted number of previous and partial historiographic studies of qualitative research in psychology have been published, for example, Giorgi, 2009; Morawski, 2011; Wertz, 2011. Erickson’s (2018) survey of the history of qualitative research in the most recent edition of the authoritative Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research fails to focus upon its application in any psychological domain. And, the parallel Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research in Psychology (Willig & Stainton Rogers, 2017) offers no historical overview of how qualitative inquiry emerged in the discipline. So, in trying to understand the origins and foundations of qualitative practices in psychology, we are faced with limited resources. In both his 2013 talk and 2014 article, Wertz indicated that the publication of Gordon Allport’s, 1942 monograph, The Use of Personal Documents in Psychological Science (UPD), was a crucial landmark, one which served as a “prophetic” call for proper qualitative methodology that was justifiably scientific. “[Allport] asserted that the study of personal documents is indispensible to knowledge of subjective personal life and provides scientific psychology with a touchstone of reality by means of a genuine scientific method” (Wertz, 2014, p. 8). Since I had previously done unpublished archival work on the development of the UPD, I discussed with both Wertz and Ruthellen Josselson, this journal’s editor, the possibility of developing a special section which might deepen the historiography of personal documents in psychological research including Allport’s (1942) own effort. Further, as Wertz (2014) noted “even after (Allport’s, 1942) call, almost 30 years passed before concerted efforts were undertaken to formulate general qualitative methodologies for psychology” (p. 5). Would it be possible to offer some greater insight or detail about how personal documentary data were approached or weighted in the period from roughly the early 1940s until about 1970? Josselson suggested as well that the dearth","PeriodicalId":37522,"journal":{"name":"Qualitative Psychology","volume":"28 1","pages":"78–81"},"PeriodicalIF":8.5,"publicationDate":"2019-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"83855006","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"A Tale of Two Methods: Gustave Gilbert, Stanley Milgram, and the “Mysterious Nazi Mind” (1945–1965)","authors":"Ian Nicholson","doi":"10.1037/qup0000098","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1037/qup0000098","url":null,"abstract":"Stanley’s Milgram’s (1963) research on “Obedience to Authority” is the most famous study in the history of American psychology. Milgram’s extraordinary historical and contemporary celebrity as “the” psychologist of Nazi atrocities stands in contrast to the relative obscurity of another American psychologist who studied the actions of real Nazis 15 years before the first results of the Obedience research were published—Gustave Gilbert (1911–1977). This article provides an overview of Gilbert’s compelling but neglected career as a psychologist of the Nazi mind and it contrasts his obscurity with Milgram’s renown. Particular attention is given to the methods used by these 2 figures. Gilbert relied primarily on qualitative methods drawn from actual Nazi leaders and his explanation was embedded in the historical particulars of prewar Germany. In contrast, Milgram appeared to transform the Holocaust into a simple laboratory tableau, one that perversely democratized the slaughter making it accessible to everyone while simultaneously implicating modern Americans in the most horrific crime in history—“had you been in Germany you would have been a Nazi too.” The appeal of these 2 approaches is considered in relation to the disciplinary and cultural ethos of Cold War America.","PeriodicalId":37522,"journal":{"name":"Qualitative Psychology","volume":"92 1","pages":"99–115"},"PeriodicalIF":8.5,"publicationDate":"2019-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"73416373","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Alternative Pathways to Activism: Intersections of Social and Personal Pasts in the Narratives of Women’s Rights Activists","authors":"Özge Savaş, A. Stewart","doi":"10.1037/qup0000117","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1037/qup0000117","url":null,"abstract":"We examined pathways to activism, focusing on the narratives of women’s rights activists who grew up in different places and times, using interview transcripts from the Global Feminisms Project archive. The findings reveal that experiencing a socially or personally disruptive event (e.g., a war or loss of a daughter due to domestic violence, respectively) facilitated activism at different stages of life in unique ways; and there were specific catalysts for activism for each stage. Those who grew up under oppressive regimes thought activism was the most “natural” response to what was going on sociopolitically; for them, feelings of freedom and strength were the catalyst. Those who experienced a disruptive event in their adolescence viewed their activism as intertwined with their personal identity; for them, love, support and togetherness were the catalyst. Finally, those who experienced disruption in their adulthood viewed their activism not as identity, but simply as action. They made sense of these actions by tracing the continuity in their lives; and for them, small political acts and accomplishments were the catalyst. The relationship between politicized identity and personal identity, as well as the bidirectional relationship between activist involvement and politicized identity is discussed in light of these findings.","PeriodicalId":37522,"journal":{"name":"Qualitative Psychology","volume":"46 1","pages":"27–46"},"PeriodicalIF":8.5,"publicationDate":"2019-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"75252286","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"The Radical Potentials of Human Experience: Maslow, Leary, and the Prehistory of Qualitative Inquiry","authors":"J. Head, Fernando Quigua, J. W. Clegg","doi":"10.1037/qup0000065","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1037/qup0000065","url":null,"abstract":"Abraham Maslow and Timothy Leary are 2 of the most well-known American psychologists from the mid-20th century. Less well-known, however, is their pioneering methodological work. In this article we explicate their transgressive research, their epistemological visions, and their struggles to enact a more existential, historical, relational, participatory, and experientially focused human science. Using their personal documents, as well as published and unpublished works, we weave their stories to create an assemblage of these unknown, unacknowledged, or forgotten histories. We try to show that, for both Maslow and Leary, the phenomena and questions they sought to understand drove them from the prevailing modernist ethos and toward new ways of thinking and working. In the process, they fashioned methods for, and visions of, science that have striking echoes in the contemporary qualitative traditions—experimenting with unquantified stories and texts as data, with iterative interpretive methods, with participatory research relationships, and with existential and postmodern philosophies of science. Of course, these bold forays into the unsanctioned forward edge of psychological inquiry were disciplined in different ways—expulsion for Leary and assimilation for Maslow, erasure for both—and this also is instructive for us. The experiences of these influential scholars reveal how the challenges and potentials of the use of personal documents in research were (and are) embedded in a broader struggle over the scientific and political value of human experience.","PeriodicalId":37522,"journal":{"name":"Qualitative Psychology","volume":"75 1","pages":"116–132"},"PeriodicalIF":8.5,"publicationDate":"2019-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"72833280","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"The Genesis of Allport’s 1942 Use of Personal Documents in Psychological Science","authors":"V. Hevern","doi":"10.1037/qup0000102","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1037/qup0000102","url":null,"abstract":"Published by the interdisciplinary Social Science Research Council (SSRC), Allport’s 1942 monograph on The Use of Personal Documents in Psychological Science (Allport, 1942) arose from the intersection of 2 sets of concerns: an extended effort by the SSRC during the 1920s and 1930s to chart the boundaries of valid research methodologies in the social sciences, and Allport’s insistence that psychology must account scientifically for individual persons in course of their actual lives. This historical review details a crisis that emerged in the late 1930s within SSRC-sponsored research concerning whether investigators could even use nonquantitative sources such as personal documents as scientific data. Allport’s own early scholarly agenda embraced German-influenced case study methods and the emerging field of personality psychology. This report outlines how, as Allport’s influence grew in the 1930s, he became a central, insistent, but relatively lonely voice rejecting psychological research methods that were exclusively experimental and quantitative. In this context, the Committee on Appraisal of Research of the SSRC accepted Allport’s self-nomination in early 1941 to assess how such data had been and could be used in psychology to achieve reliable and valid scientific results. This review traces how he went about the assignment and the uncertain evaluation he gave of his own work as it reached publication.","PeriodicalId":37522,"journal":{"name":"Qualitative Psychology","volume":"20 1","pages":"82–98"},"PeriodicalIF":8.5,"publicationDate":"2019-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"82585849","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"It Is Time to Share (Some) Qualitative Data: Reply to Guishard (2018), McCurdy and Ross (2018), and Roller and Lavrakas (2018)","authors":"J. DuBois, Heidi A Walsh, Michelle Strait","doi":"10.1037/qup0000092","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1037/qup0000092","url":null,"abstract":"In this article, we offer a reply to the three commentaries on our article, “Is It Time to Share Qualitative Research Data?” (DuBois, Strait, & Walsh, 2018). We agree with the commenters on many points, including the need to honor relationships with communities, the need to protect participants from harm, and the usefulness of having a framework for data sharing that is informed by quality standards. We also respond to several areas of apparent disagreement regarding the need to be accountable to those who fund and consume science, the possibility that many participants—much like authors—prefer that their contributions to science be broadly disseminated and presented in proper context, and the common legal fact of institutional ownership of research data in the United States. We conclude that it will not be possible to share all data in a responsible manner but that this does not prevent a change in our default assumption regarding qualitative data sharing. In general, data should be shared unless compelling concerns exist that cannot be addressed adequately.","PeriodicalId":37522,"journal":{"name":"Qualitative Psychology","volume":"27 1","pages":"412–415"},"PeriodicalIF":8.5,"publicationDate":"2018-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"75443640","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}