“由你决定”:自助书籍、抑郁症和阅读重建

IF 2.3 1区 文学 Q1 COMMUNICATION
Amber E Gwynne
{"title":"“由你决定”:自助书籍、抑郁症和阅读重建","authors":"Amber E Gwynne","doi":"10.1177/01634437231198431","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Like other consumers of ‘low-brow’ genres, self-help readers elicit polarized views in the literature. While little research to date has focused specifically on self-help readers with a history of mental illness, existing commentary reveals a particular tension: on the one hand, clinical researchers report positive outcomes for depressed readers engaged in bibliotherapy programs using self-help books, similar or superior to medication or talk therapy; on the other, scholars of media and culture express misgivings about the quality of self-help texts and highlight the negative potential of therapeutic discourse for individual readers and audiences more generally. By asking what actual readers do with self-help books, however, my research suggests an altogether more complex interaction between readers and the books they choose and use – especially as they navigate experiences of mental illness. Leveraging a reader-response heuristic in which I interviewed a cohort of Australian readers, this paper details some of the ways in which habitual consumers of self-help books describe their own interpretive activities, problematizing previous research that either emphasizes or downplays the significant expertise of vernacular audiences.","PeriodicalId":18417,"journal":{"name":"Media, Culture & Society","volume":"52 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"‘Up to you’: Self-help books, depression and the reconstruction of reading\",\"authors\":\"Amber E Gwynne\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/01634437231198431\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Like other consumers of ‘low-brow’ genres, self-help readers elicit polarized views in the literature. While little research to date has focused specifically on self-help readers with a history of mental illness, existing commentary reveals a particular tension: on the one hand, clinical researchers report positive outcomes for depressed readers engaged in bibliotherapy programs using self-help books, similar or superior to medication or talk therapy; on the other, scholars of media and culture express misgivings about the quality of self-help texts and highlight the negative potential of therapeutic discourse for individual readers and audiences more generally. By asking what actual readers do with self-help books, however, my research suggests an altogether more complex interaction between readers and the books they choose and use – especially as they navigate experiences of mental illness. Leveraging a reader-response heuristic in which I interviewed a cohort of Australian readers, this paper details some of the ways in which habitual consumers of self-help books describe their own interpretive activities, problematizing previous research that either emphasizes or downplays the significant expertise of vernacular audiences.\",\"PeriodicalId\":18417,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Media, Culture & Society\",\"volume\":\"52 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Media, Culture & Society\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/01634437231198431\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"文学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"COMMUNICATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Media, Culture & Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/01634437231198431","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"COMMUNICATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

和其他“低俗”类型的读者一样,自助读者在文学作品中引发了两极分化的观点。虽然迄今为止很少有研究专门关注有精神病史的自助读者,但现有的评论揭示了一种特殊的紧张关系:一方面,临床研究人员报告说,使用自助书籍进行阅读治疗项目的抑郁读者取得了积极的结果,类似或优于药物治疗或谈话治疗;另一方面,媒体和文化学者对自助文本的质量表示担忧,并更普遍地强调了治疗话语对个体读者和受众的负面潜力。然而,通过询问实际读者对自助书籍的看法,我的研究表明,读者与他们选择和使用的书籍之间存在着一种更为复杂的互动——尤其是在他们经历精神疾病的时候。利用读者反应启发法,我采访了一群澳大利亚读者,本文详细介绍了自助书籍的习惯性消费者描述他们自己的解释活动的一些方式,并对先前的研究提出了问题,这些研究要么强调,要么淡化了母语读者的重要专业知识。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
‘Up to you’: Self-help books, depression and the reconstruction of reading
Like other consumers of ‘low-brow’ genres, self-help readers elicit polarized views in the literature. While little research to date has focused specifically on self-help readers with a history of mental illness, existing commentary reveals a particular tension: on the one hand, clinical researchers report positive outcomes for depressed readers engaged in bibliotherapy programs using self-help books, similar or superior to medication or talk therapy; on the other, scholars of media and culture express misgivings about the quality of self-help texts and highlight the negative potential of therapeutic discourse for individual readers and audiences more generally. By asking what actual readers do with self-help books, however, my research suggests an altogether more complex interaction between readers and the books they choose and use – especially as they navigate experiences of mental illness. Leveraging a reader-response heuristic in which I interviewed a cohort of Australian readers, this paper details some of the ways in which habitual consumers of self-help books describe their own interpretive activities, problematizing previous research that either emphasizes or downplays the significant expertise of vernacular audiences.
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
CiteScore
6.40
自引率
12.10%
发文量
101
期刊介绍: Media, Culture & Society provides a major international forum for the presentation of research and discussion concerning the media, including the newer information and communication technologies, within their political, economic, cultural and historical contexts. It regularly engages with a wider range of issues in cultural and social analysis. Its focus is on substantive topics and on critique and innovation in theory and method. An interdisciplinary journal, it welcomes contributions in any relevant areas and from a worldwide authorship.
×
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