Personal construct psychology and social constructionism are not incompatible

Implications of a reframing

Bibliographic Data

ID20400391
AuthorsJelena Pavlović (0000-0003-2049-6755, Institute for Educational Research, Belgrade,, corresponding author)
Year2011
Volume21
Issue3
Pages396-411
Publication date2011-06-01
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueTheory & Psychology (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0959-3543 • E-ISSN: 1461-7447
PublisherSAGE Publications (PUBLISHER • US)
DOI10.1177/0959354310380302
OpenAlexW2318194486
LanguageEN
Citations received3
References cited26

A usual way of thinking about the relationship between personal construct psychology (PCP) and social constructionism (SC) is treating them as two separate entities that are similar in some aspects, but also very different in others. This paper aims at exploring some of the possible implications of reframing the relationship between PCP and SC. I point to two important implications: treating PCP as a discourse and adding a new metaphor of the person. Finally, I argue that the invitation to reframe the relationship between PCP and SC extends both approaches and offers more than each of them alone. On one hand, it extends and enriches SC theory and points to benefits of applying the PCP “toolkit” to constructionist therapy and research. On the other hand, proposed reframing contributes to PCP theory and points to new ways of addressing social construction in therapeutic conversations

Cognitive reframing · Discourse analysis · Discursive psychology · Epistemology · Metaphor · Personal construct theory · Social constructionism · Sociology · Strict constructionism · Cognitive and psychological constructs research · Computer Science · Language, Metaphor, and Cognition · Psychology · Social Psychology · Social Representations and Identity

Tools

Open DOISci-Hub