Добавил:
ivanov666
Опубликованный материал нарушает ваши авторские права? Сообщите нам.
Вуз:
Предмет:
Файл:Dialogical self theory and mediation. Toward a self-narrative model of conflict resolution
.pdf
to dynamic processes of positioning, repositioning and counter-positioning, meaning
that selves are able to change their views, take distance to some questions, form
coalitions with others, and create solutions in difficult situations, where two positions are
in conflict in personal and social spaces (cf. Kuusela, 2011: 122).
Third position
Third position is created when two positions are involved in the conflict. They
can find reconciliation in the third position. In this regard, Hermans and HermansKonopka (2010) exemplify a story from Branco et al. (2008) about Catholic lesbian
woman Rosanne from Brazil. Her inner conflicts (being Catholic and lesbian) has led her
to develop a third position of a missionary that would give her an opportunity to comply
her lesbian nature with traditional Christian beliefs. Being Christian, she approached the
decision to give a hand to lost and forsaken, including gays and lesbians, to overcome
this dilemmatic situation (cf. Hermans/Gieser, 2012: 15).
Meta-position (extra-positionality)
The ability of I-position to leave a specific position and observe, as in an act of
self-reflection, is called a meta-position (“helicopter view”). Meta-position sometimes
also called “observing ego” or “meta-cognition” allows a certain distance from one or
more other positions, but can prefer some positions more than the other, as well. Metapositions allow “off-line thinking” (Damasio, 2010) that allows person to delay
immediate reactions and facilitates the organization of the self beyond the moment.
Meta-positions take a broader scope of different I-positions into account and have an
executive function. They facilitate coherence and organization of the self from the
spatial point of view (cf. Hermans/Gieser, 2011: 15-16).
41
Promoter positions
A promoter positions are required to understand the organization of the self
from the developmental perspective. They facilitate coherence and organization of the
self from a temporal perspective. One of the main characteristics of the promoter
positions is openness to the future. It has a capacity of reorganizing the self towards a
higher level of development. Promoter positions act as innovators of the self. Promoter
positions have a status of “others-in-the-self” that populate the extended domain of the
self. Those are significant others (father, mother, teacher) that act as promoters. They
can also be inspiring figures (real and imagined ones) in the arts, literature, science,
politics, film or music. Promoter positions can also emerge in the internal domain of the
self (developmental stimulant of I-position e.g. “I as always going on”). Sometimes
external and internal positions are closely linked and interconnected, so there is no actual
distinction possible (cf. Hermans/Gieser, 2012: 16-18).
Depositioning, transcendental awareness and silence
In the dialogical relationships it is not necessarily important to always negotiate.
There are such experiences between different I-positions leading towards a wider
awareness through attention. In the state of depositioning there is no critical views on the
self as in the meta-positions. The state of extended awareness is not only characteristic to
specific people like mystics or spiritualists, but to ordinary people, too. For example, the
one can listen to a piece of music or see a painting or look over a landscape and
experience the unity with others and everything (cf. Hermans/Gieser, 2012: 18-20).
Dialogicality
To what extent is self dialogical? On the sub-lingual level humans are more
conservative and monological rather than innovative and dialogical. These findings
Hermans and Hermans-Konopka (2010) borrow from Lewis (2002), who analyzed
such short phrases as „that was stupid“ or „you are dumb“ that a person tells to himself
when involved in a task. Lewis assumes, these can be voices of significant others from
42
the remote past that are embodied in the extended domain of the self. In the situation
of stress and uncertainty humans usually want to come back to „safe“ positions. There
can be no dialogue in such short phrases. Moreover, such phrases reduce the brain's
ability to go into dialogical relationships with the other and the other in the self.
So what is dialogue? Bakhtin (1984: 293) suggests that dialogue is always
there: „Life is by its very nature is dialogic“ (cited from Hermans/Gieser, 2012: 12).
On the contrast, for Buber the life is not always dialogical as sometimes we are involved
in the I-thou relationships and sometimes in the I-it relationships. Bohm (1996), a
quantum physicist interested in philosophy, also argues that the dialogue is only present
under the specific ci rcumstances, especially when people are involved in a common
creative process. DST agrees with Buber and Bohm for two reasons:
• It is possible to learn much about dialogue only when focusing on its constraints.
• Dialogue is not an ordinary thing. It does not come out on its own. By means of
dialogue individuals and societies are able to create new and innovative meanings, to
cooperate productively and learn to take the otherness and self- otherness into account
for the well-being of themselves and society (cf. Hermans/Gieser, 2012: 11-13).
To sum up, dialogical self theory asserts that there is a multiplicity of voices and
accordingly positions within the self that emerge from intrinsic social and cultural
contacts in the time of ever transcending cross-borders. The spatial extension of the
self allows to acknowledge its own cultural, societal and social positions as well as to
extend itself to positions of imagined and actual others in the process of positioning
and counter-positioning (e.g. as a student I'm working with professors who can critically
treat my abilities and I'm principally able to take their position and answer to it). The
temporal extension of the self takes place in the process of positioning and repositioning
(e.g. in case of inevitable critique of my professors to me I may at first react quite
emotionally, however some time later I can reposition myself to their position while
being interested in their point of view). As a result of such spatial- temporal processes
the I vacillates between different sometimes opposed positions both within the self,
and between self and perceived and actual others. These positions like in society in
general are involved in the relationships of social power and dominance, meaning that
some positions become more powerf ul and more dominant than others. These positions
43
can be voiced so that the dialogical relationships between them may occur. Involved in
3
4
5
the process of question and answer, agreement and disagreement, conflict and
cooperation, negotiation and integration, each of these voices has its own story to tell.
Hence, they build a complex, multi-voiced and narratively structured self. However
dialogical self does not only acknowledge individual I-positions, but the self has ability
to extend itself to actual others (see also James, 1890) incorporating them in itself, too,
so that they become a part of a personal position repertoire. That is, the actual other is
not perceived as a complete outsider, but as an external I-position. This goes back to
Bakhtin's ([1929] 1973) findings of Dostoevsky's work for whom “the hero is not he and
not I, but full-valued thou, that is another full-fledged I“ (p.15)3. That is, the other is
treated not as an object ( he), but a subject (you). Only in I-you relationships dialogue
can evolve. Such occurrence of multiple voices within one and the same individual can
lead to inner conflicts and their resolutions by means of a good dialogue. Dialogue is not
self-evident and occurs only under specific circumstances. The main benefit of a
dialogue is that one can learn from the other and is able to alter in accordance with this
knowledge. Good dialogue has ability to innovate the self.
3.2. Methods for assessment of personal positions
Personal Position Repertoire (PPR)
Personal Position Repertoire (PPR) method is “an idiographic procedure for
assessing the internal and external domains of the self in terms of an organized position
repertoire”4, which was constructed by Hermans (2001b). In the PPR method the
participant is offered a list of internal and external self-positions5. Those positions
considered as recognizable and relevant are marked. As well, the participant is asked
to complement the list with additional positions, which are according to her missing in
the list. Afterwards, the participant is invited to fill in a matrix with the internal
positions (rows) and external positions (columns) to establish relationships between
Cited from Encyclopedia of Critical Psychology © Springer Reference 2012
http://www.springerreference.com/docs/html/chapterdbid/304727.html [Retrieved December 2012]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialogical_self [Retrieved December 2012]
For the full list proposed by Hermans (2001b) see Appendix 1
44
them (Tab. 3.1.). In the entries of the matrix the participant fills in a number from 0 to 5
to the extent which correlates with prominence of relation of a particular internal
position with a particular external one, with 0 – not at all and 5 – very considerable. So
the central question at it is „To what extent is this internal position prominent in
relation to that external position?“ (Hermans 2001b: 330). “Prominent“ here relates to a
dynamic process of positioning in space and helps client to assess her positions in
contextual relations. The overall prominence indices are the sum scores of particular
internal or external positions as well as of their correlations with each other.
Table 3.1. Example of matrix with internal/external positions. From: Hermans 2001b: 327-328.
Such a quantitative analysis allows to elicit the most priority positions for a closer
inspection. From then on, the client is invited to tell a story that reflects the experience
associated with a particular position, and besides, find out other positions that can be
in dialogical relations to that position. As such, method incorporates both quantitative
and qualitative analyses. Hermans explains that stage metaphor suits best to describe
the PPR method. Internal positions enter from the left side of the stage, whereas external
positions – from the right. Positions are imagined as moving in space and are being
45
involved in dynamic processes of positioning and repositioning (cf. Hermans, 2001b:
329). Most of internal positions sound like personal traits, although they are not.
Personal traits are supposed to be valid across various situations, whereas personal
positions are only situation-specific. Another difference is that personal positions are
self-reflective, whereas traits are not (cf. Hermans 2001b: 332).
To enable a deeper analysis of the self A. Kluger, D. Nir and Y. Kluger (2008)
proposed a refined procedure for the PPR method by creating a bi-plot of the aspects
underlying their internal and external positions. Bi-plot technologies allow to create a
comprehensible and transparent visual map that includes relations between all significant
positions within the self making all the positions concurrently visible. Thereby one can
easily observe and analyze clusters of internal and external positions as well as
dominant patterns (Fig. 3.1.). To perform a standard Principal Component Analysis
(PCA) is the simplest approach the psychologist can take. However, PCA is still a
complicated mathematical procedure. To obtain a bi-plot, one performs a PCA once on
the external positions, and once on the internal ones, wherein the number of components
is restricted to two. Afterwa rds, one plots a scatter (the degree to which repeated
measurements or observations of a quantity differ) of the two PCAs on the same plane,
so that the results of the first components are projected to the X-asis, whereas results of
the second components to the Y-axis. By so doing, one obtains a whole overview of the
organization of personal position repertoire of the self, which serves as a basis for further
(qualitative) in-depth analysis.
46
Figure 3.1. Example of a PPR's bi-plot with possible cluster interpretation. From:
Kluger/Nir/Kluger (2008: 227)
Self-Confrontation Method – valuation and affect
Self-confrontation method (SCM) is another way of studying dialogical
relationships within the self. It was developed by Hermans and Hermans-Jansen (1995)
in order to help to construct and reconstruct the self as an organized process of
valuation. The basic metaphor underlying the valuation theory is a person as a motivated
story-teller, i.e. somebody who has a story to tell about his/her life. In his/her story the
person signifies particular events or a group of events from his life, which are
attributed as „units of meaning“ or simply „valuations“. The term valuation proposes
that a person ascribes some positive, negative or ambivalent values or meanings to the
events of his past, present and future. The motives for the organization and
reorganization of a person's valuation system are two-fold: on one hand, the self is
attempting to protect and keep itself (self-enhancement), and on the other hand, it
47
longs for contact and union with others. These elements together build on a metaphor
of the person as a motivated story-teller (cf. Hermans/Hermans-Jansen, 1995: 1).
PPR method helps to identify significant interal and external positions, however,
it does not provide narrations and meanings from the perspective of the particular
position. SCM method is exactly constructed to elicit and evaluate significant valuations
and emotions associated with them. In terms of hierarchy, positions take the superior
role, valuations are somewhere in the middle (there are more than one valuations for
each position), whereas affect is the lowest of all (there are more than one affects for
each valuation). SCM is an idiographic procedure in which participants are invited to
reflect on their past, present and future in their own terms. The method is divided into
three phases:
1. Self-investigation phase in which the participants tell their self-narratives in
the form of valuation system (telling);
2. Validation/invalidation phase in which participants work on changing their
current system of valuations or relevant parts of it (action);
3. Second self-investigation phase in which participants retell their stories
from the perspective of reorganized system of valuations (retelling).
Together these phases form a cycle of Investigation-Validation-Investigation
(IVI). Hence, the basic idea of the method is „reflection in action“.
Valuations are usually elicited by and are formulated in response to open
questions regarding either participant's past, present or future. For the past the questions
are: „Has there been anything of major significance in your past life that still continues
to exert a strong influence on you? Was there any person, experience, or circumstance
that greatly influenced yor life in the past, and still affects your present existence?“ The
same questions are formulated in the present tense to elicit basic valuations for the
present. Accordingly, for the future the same questions are formulated in the future tense.
An example of valuation from, let us assume, a position of child: „My brother and
sisters are my rivals“ or „I want attention and I want recognition“ (examples are
borrowed from Hermans 2001b: 339).
As has been said, the valuations are genuinely connected to various affect terms
that can be more than one for each valuation. Affect terms as used in SCM are
48
basically divided into four types: positive (P) and negative (N), referring to the
6
experience of self-enhancement (S) and contact and union with others (O). For instance,
joy (P) is positive, unhappiness (N) is negative , strenghth (S) refers to the experience of
self-enhancement, and love (O) as referred to other6.
Table 3.2. Example of matrix of certain positions' valuations and affect terms.
From:6 Hermans 2001b: 344
Afterwards, the participant is invited to fill out a matrix, just like in PPR
method (Tab. 3.2.). The valuations are given in rows and affect terms in columns. In
the entries of the matrix the participant enters a number from 0 to 5, to the extend he or
she experiences each affect in relation to a specific valuation, with 0 – not at all and 5 –
very much. Then, the scores are calculated and main indices become apparent. Some
time after quantitative analysis client and therapist meet each other for an extesive selfreflection on the part of the participant.
In the second Validation/Invalidation phase the participant together with his or
her therapist undergo three subphases such as attending, creating, anchoring (ACA).
That is, they want first to get clear about the ongoing events. After that, they initiate
For the full list of affect terms proposed by Hermans and Hermans-Jansen (1995) see Appendix 2
49
new actions and experiment with them, i.e. new events are being constructed. Soon after,
the new events are anchored in a participant's valuation by practicing.
During the second self-investigation phase, mostly performed several months
later, the participant and therapist come back to initial valuations and find out whether
they still have place to be, or not. Unfortunately, there is no room here to provide all
the details regarding the method and its details. For a closer inquiry please see Hermans
and Hermans-Jansen (1995).
The following chapter will borrow the valuable insights presented here in order to
construct a new model of mediation.
50
Соседние файлы в предмете [НЕСОРТИРОВАННОЕ]