Forrester1999CAa reflexive methodology for critical psychology.docx

Forrester1999CAa reflexive methodology for critical psychology.docx

《Forrester1999CAa reflexive methodology for critical psychology.docx》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《Forrester1999CAa reflexive methodology for critical psychology.docx（17页珍藏版）》请在冰豆网上搜索。

Forrester1999CAareflexivemethodologyforcriticalpsychology

AnnualReviewofCriticalPsychology

Copyright©1999DiscourseUnit

Vol.1,pp.34-49（ISSN:

1464-0538）

Conversationanalysis:

areflexivemethodologyforcriticalpsychology

MichaelA.Forrester

Abstract.Thispaperconsidersthepotentialvalueofconversationanalysis（CA）asareflexivemethodologyforcriticalpsychology.FollowinganoutlineofconstructswithinethnomethodologicallyinspiredCA,anumberofimplicationsforcriticaldevelopmentinpsychologyareoutlined.NotingtheincreasinguseofCAwithinpsychology,discussiontouchesonthereflexivityinherentinthismethodologicalenterprise,anditstendencytowardstheoreticalclosure.Thesuggestionismadehowever,that`doingCA`encouragesanunderstandingofreflexivepracticebyrequiringacriticalawarenessofparticipant-orientedmethodsfor`makingsenseof`everydayactivities.WhetherCAcancontributetowardsfacilitatingapost-structuralistcriticalityisthenconsidered,followedbyconcludingcommentsonthepotentialadvantagesofCAforcriticalpsychology.

Keywords:

conversationanalysis,reflexivity,ethnomethodology

Criticalpsychologyaimstochallengethedominanttheoriesandperspectivesinpsychologyandworktowardsredressingtheinjustices,misrepresentationsandimplicitideologicalimbalancesendemictoacademicandprofessionalpractice.Numerouswritersvoicedissatisfactionatsomeofthemoreinsidiousmethodologicalproceduresandpracticesinpsychology,techniqueswhichinlargepartpositionpeopleas`objectsofstudy`somedistancefromthepsychologistasinvestigator.InthispaperIaimtoworkuptheproposalthattheethnomethodologicallyinspiredreflexivityofconversationanalysis（CA）mayprovideaconceptuallyrichmethodologicalframeworkforcriticalpsychologistsinterestedinextendingpsychology`sboundariesandengagingwithcontemporarycriticalthought.

ThemainreasonwhyareflexiveoutlooksympathetictocriticalpsychologycanbeencouragedthroughusingCAisbecauseoftheconcernithaswithparticipantsownorientationstothemeaningmakingpracticesofeverydaylife.However,suchanaimislikelytobeachievedonlyifcareistakentorecognise,andcriticallyengagewith,thepositivistictendenciesofCAasamethod,andtherestrictiveprofessionalismitcanexhibitasasub-disciplinespecialism.AlthoughdoingCAcanengenderadeepappreciationoftheartfulachievementofpeople`sordinaryandeverydaytalk,itcanalsogiverisetoaseductionwiththe`data`-engenderinganuncriticalmethodologicalfantasythatthestructuresandproceduresidentifiedbytheanalyst`capture`andconstitutetherealityofsocialencounters.IntracingoutacriticalcommentaryofCAIaimtosuggestoneortwowaysinwhichthismethodologycancontributetothefoundationalbasisofcriticalpsychologyprimarilybybuildinguponthereflexivityCAinheritsfromethnomethodology（Garfinkel,1967;Heritage,1984;Czyzewski,1989;Potter,1996）.

InordertounderstandthereflexivityCAengenders,anumberofcommentsonCA`sethnomethodologicalfoundationscanserveasausefulstartingposition.ThiswillhelpfirmoutabackgroundfortheproposalthatCAcouldbeofparticularvaluetocriticalpsychologyifitencouragesacriticalorientationtoit`sownproceduresandavoidatendencytowardsmethodologicalclosure.Followingashortoutlineofethnomethodology,CAandanexampleformulationofparticularvaluetocriticalpsychology（membershipcategorisationdevices）,thediscussiontouchesontwoconstructswhichhaveparticularresonanceinpsychologymoregenerally:

reflexivityandintersubjectivity.WhyCAopensupacriticalpsychologicalwindowonothermoretraditionalareasofthedisciplineisthenconsidered,followedbyabriefdiscussiononwhetherCAmaybeamethodologicalprojectofpotentialvaluetopost-structuralperspectives.AnumberofconcludingcommentsfocusontheshortcomingandpossibilitiesofCAasareflexivemethodologyforcriticalpsychology.

EthnomethodologyandCA

Thedissatisfactionthatcriticalpsychologyhaswiththemainstreamdisciplinebearssomesimilaritiestocriticismsvoicedbyasmallnumberofsociologistsduringthe1960`swhobrokeawayfrommainstreamsociologydevelopingwhatbecameknownasethnomethodology.SignificantinthisdevelopmentwerethewritingsofSchultz（1962）whoarguedthatthesocialworldisfundamentallyanintersubjectiveone,alivingcontextofeverydayroutines,wheremostofouractivitiesareaccomplishedmechanically（non-cognitively）,andrealitynaturalandobvious.ProminentalsowasGarfinkel,whooutlinedtheethnomethdologicalresearchprinciple,emphasisingthat:

Theobjectiverealityofsocialfactsasanongoingaccomplishmentoftheconcertedactivitiesofdailylife,withtheordinary,artfulwaysofthataccomplishmentbeingbymembersknown,usedandtakenforgrantedisafundamentalphenomenon（Garfinkel,1967:

II）.

The`takenforgranted`intersubjectivelyknownfactsofeverydaylifebecamethecentralfocusofthisperspective.Definingethnomethodologyasascientificproject,Coulon（1995,p.1）suggeststheaimis,

toanalyzethemethods,ortheprocedures,thatpeopleuseforconductingthedifferentaffairsthattheyaccomplishintheirdailylives.Ethnomethodologyistheanalysisoftheordinarymethodsthatpeopleusetorealisetheirordinaryactions.

Inotherwords,theobjectofenquiryshouldbe`thesetoftechniquesthatthemembersofasocietythemselvesutilisetointerpretandactwithintheirownsocialworld.`（Levinson,1983,p.295）.Ethnomethodologycanbedefinedasthestudyof`ethnic`（theparticipant`sown）methodsofproductionandinterpretationofsocialinteraction.Asothershavenoted,withinpsychologywhereverlanguageorcommunicationistheobjectofenquiryanalystshavetendedtouncriticallyadoptprocedureswhichformulatetheproductionofcategoricalabstractions,subsequentlyformingtheanalyticbasisofparticipantsdiscourse（Edwards,1997）.Incontrast,insteadofassumingthatpeoplefollowrules（howeverconceivedbytheanalyst）,theaimistoarticulatethemethodswhichtheactorsthemselvesuseto`actualise`whateverrules,conventionsornormativepracticestheymaybeorientedto.ToquoteCoulon（1995,pp.16-17）again:

Thesemethodsarewhatmakerulesobservableandcapableofbeingdescribed.Thepracticalactivitiesofmembers,engagedintheirconcreteactivities,revealtherulesandtheprocessesthatcanbestudied.Inotherwords,thecarefulobservationandanalysisoftheprocessesusedinthemembers`actionswilluncovertheprocessesbywhichtheactorsconstantlyinterpretsocialrealityandinventlifeinapermanenttinkering.Therefore,itiscrucialtoobservehow,inacommon-sensemanner,actorsproduceandtreatinformationintheirexchangesandhowtheyuselanguageasaresource;inshort,howtheybuildupa`reasonable`worldtobeabletoliveinit.

Notwithstandingtherathergrandioseclaimthatethnomethologyseekstoanalyseproductionprocedureswithmakeanyexperienceofrealitypossible（Czyzewski,1989）,twoconstructscentraltotheprojectwillserveasaflavouroftheenterprise:

reflexivityandintersubjectivity.Itisnoaccidentthatreflexivityhasbecomeafeatureofcriticalpsychology（Condor,1997）andintersubjectvityanimportanttopicwithindiscursivepsychology（Edwards,1997）anareaofthedisciplinewhichhaspaidtributetotheinfluenceofethnomethodologyinthedevelopmentofitstheoreticalperspective（EdwardsandPotter,1993）.

Beginningwiththeideaofreflexivity,essentiallythereflexivityofconversationanalysisisformedthroughthemethodologicalinjunctionthatallphenomenaaretobeunderstoodinterdependentlywiththeexplanationofthephenomenathemselves.AsReason（1998,p.1）notes,

ThereflexivityofCAaspirestobeingaCriticalreflexivity,inwhichtheprocessesoftheproductionofthepossibilityoftheexistenceofphenomenaaretobeunderstood（andtheorised）integrallywiththeexplanationofthephenomenathemselves.Thereisnodisjunctionbetweentheoryandmethodology,butacrucialcontinuity.

Inethnomethodology,thesuggestionisnotthatpeoplethemselvesarehyper-selfreflexiveandconstantlythinkingaboutwhattheyaredoingandsaying.Rather,asGarfinkelynoted,whenengagedineverydayactivitiespeoplearenotconcerned（generally）withdiscussingpracticalactionsinaself-reflexivefashion:

Theyrecognize,demonstrate,andmakeobservableforeachothertherationalcharacteroftheiractual,andthatmeanstheiroccasional,practiceswhilerespectingthatreflexivityasanunalterableandunavoidableconditionoftheirinquiries.（Garfinkel,1967,p.8）

ToparaphraseCoulon（1995）,reflexivityreferstothepracticesthatdescribeandatthesametimeconstituteasocialframework.Engagedinthebusinessofeverydaytalk,assoonaswedescribeaspectsofoursocialworld,thoseverydescriptionsbecomepartandparcelofthatworld.Forethnomethodology,reflexivityisthatessentialfeatureofsocialactionthatpresupposestheconditionsofit`sproduction,andatthesametimemakes（acts）observableasactionsofarecognisablesort.Themeaningofreflexivityhereisakintopresupposition,i.e.,theideathatanycommunicativeactrecognisedasintentionalwillrestuponthosepresuppositionssaidtoconstitute`sharedsocialknowledge`.Intalkandinteractionpresupposedintersubjectiveknowledgeisthepractical,socialknowledgethatcompetentspeakerscanbesaidtohold,`implicitknowledge,tacitlyheldbymembersofaculture-impliedinthethingsthatpeoplesayanddo.`（Ramsden