超越症状分类:从拉康话语分析视角分析强迫症患者的主体性

Sinem Baltaci, Sevda SARI DEMİR, T. Gençöz
{"title":"超越症状分类:从拉康话语分析视角分析强迫症患者的主体性","authors":"Sinem Baltaci, Sevda SARI DEMİR, T. Gençöz","doi":"10.57127/kpd.26024438m0000111","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Intrusive thoughts and repetitive behaviors are very diverse and occur in numerous forms but people with such different forms of symptoms are diagnosed under the category of obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) in the symptom-based system. The social constructivist approach, which is having an increasingly and substantial impact on psychotherapy research, emphasizes the subjectivity of individuals since the therapeutic field focuses on one-on-one work. Although studies on psychotherapy and language use are expanding, specifically the subjectivity of people labeled with the obsessive-compulsive disorder has not yet been studied by using a combination of qualitative, discursive, critical, and language-based perspectives. The main purpose of this study is to critically evaluate the symptom-based diagnosis in the therapeutic process especially OCD symptoms, with a particular emphasis on the subjectivity of people and their discursive practices. For this aim, interviews were conducted with six participants, who diagnosed with OCD and selected via purposive sampling method. As for the qualitative analysis, critical and Lacanian Discourse Analysis perspectives were utilized. The analysis revealed that the participants’ basic signifiers, positioning, and relationships with the Other were quite distinct, although they were all diagnosed under the same category of OCD. Additionally, differentiated discourses of the patients and gender differences emerged crucial issues, that were discussed considering literature. These findings suggested that individuals should be carefully listened to within their subjectivity and psychological structures rather than being broadly categorized based on their symptom similarity. Based on the findings, the current study presents a diagnostic debate and key clinical implications.","PeriodicalId":344209,"journal":{"name":"Klinik Psikoloji Dergisi","volume":"76 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Beyond Symptom Classification: Analyzing Subjectivity of People Diagnosed with Obsessive Compulsive Disorder Through Lacanian Discourse Analysis Perspective\",\"authors\":\"Sinem Baltaci, Sevda SARI DEMİR, T. Gençöz\",\"doi\":\"10.57127/kpd.26024438m0000111\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Intrusive thoughts and repetitive behaviors are very diverse and occur in numerous forms but people with such different forms of symptoms are diagnosed under the category of obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) in the symptom-based system. The social constructivist approach, which is having an increasingly and substantial impact on psychotherapy research, emphasizes the subjectivity of individuals since the therapeutic field focuses on one-on-one work. Although studies on psychotherapy and language use are expanding, specifically the subjectivity of people labeled with the obsessive-compulsive disorder has not yet been studied by using a combination of qualitative, discursive, critical, and language-based perspectives. The main purpose of this study is to critically evaluate the symptom-based diagnosis in the therapeutic process especially OCD symptoms, with a particular emphasis on the subjectivity of people and their discursive practices. For this aim, interviews were conducted with six participants, who diagnosed with OCD and selected via purposive sampling method. As for the qualitative analysis, critical and Lacanian Discourse Analysis perspectives were utilized. The analysis revealed that the participants’ basic signifiers, positioning, and relationships with the Other were quite distinct, although they were all diagnosed under the same category of OCD. Additionally, differentiated discourses of the patients and gender differences emerged crucial issues, that were discussed considering literature. These findings suggested that individuals should be carefully listened to within their subjectivity and psychological structures rather than being broadly categorized based on their symptom similarity. Based on the findings, the current study presents a diagnostic debate and key clinical implications.\",\"PeriodicalId\":344209,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Klinik Psikoloji Dergisi\",\"volume\":\"76 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-03-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Klinik Psikoloji Dergisi\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.57127/kpd.26024438m0000111\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Klinik Psikoloji Dergisi","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.57127/kpd.26024438m0000111","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

侵入性思想和重复性行为非常多样,并且以多种形式出现,但具有这种不同形式症状的人在症状基础系统中被诊断为强迫症(OCD)。社会建构主义方法在心理治疗研究中产生了越来越大的影响,它强调个体的主体性,因为治疗领域侧重于一对一的工作。虽然关于心理治疗和语言使用的研究正在扩大,特别是被贴上强迫症标签的人的主观性还没有被定性、话语、批判和基于语言的观点结合起来研究。本研究的主要目的是批判性地评估治疗过程中基于症状的诊断,特别是强迫症症状,特别强调人的主体性及其话语实践。为此,通过有目的的抽样方法,对6名被诊断为强迫症的参与者进行了访谈。在定性分析方面,运用了批判和拉康语篇分析的观点。分析显示,参与者的基本能指、定位和与他者的关系都非常不同,尽管他们都被诊断为同一类型的强迫症。此外,差异化的病人话语和性别差异出现了关键问题,这是讨论考虑文献。这些发现表明,个体应该仔细听取他们的主体性和心理结构,而不是根据他们的症状相似性进行广泛的分类。基于这些发现,目前的研究提出了诊断争论和关键的临床意义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Beyond Symptom Classification: Analyzing Subjectivity of People Diagnosed with Obsessive Compulsive Disorder Through Lacanian Discourse Analysis Perspective
Intrusive thoughts and repetitive behaviors are very diverse and occur in numerous forms but people with such different forms of symptoms are diagnosed under the category of obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) in the symptom-based system. The social constructivist approach, which is having an increasingly and substantial impact on psychotherapy research, emphasizes the subjectivity of individuals since the therapeutic field focuses on one-on-one work. Although studies on psychotherapy and language use are expanding, specifically the subjectivity of people labeled with the obsessive-compulsive disorder has not yet been studied by using a combination of qualitative, discursive, critical, and language-based perspectives. The main purpose of this study is to critically evaluate the symptom-based diagnosis in the therapeutic process especially OCD symptoms, with a particular emphasis on the subjectivity of people and their discursive practices. For this aim, interviews were conducted with six participants, who diagnosed with OCD and selected via purposive sampling method. As for the qualitative analysis, critical and Lacanian Discourse Analysis perspectives were utilized. The analysis revealed that the participants’ basic signifiers, positioning, and relationships with the Other were quite distinct, although they were all diagnosed under the same category of OCD. Additionally, differentiated discourses of the patients and gender differences emerged crucial issues, that were discussed considering literature. These findings suggested that individuals should be carefully listened to within their subjectivity and psychological structures rather than being broadly categorized based on their symptom similarity. Based on the findings, the current study presents a diagnostic debate and key clinical implications.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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