{"title":"对比与协同:评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":"{\"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}","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}
Contrasts and synergies: A comment on Jones (2022)
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.
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.