Accounting for health and illness: A social psychological investigation

This thesis identifies and describes some of the main accounts for health and illness that are current in British culture, placing them within broader contexts of psychological, sociological, traditional, religious and moral discourses; within broader explanatory frameworks; and, by way of an analysis of these ecological aspects, seeks to illuminate our understanding of such accounting. A combination of Q and ethnographic methods were used to elucidate a variety of alternative ways that people "make sense" of health and illness. Three main studies were conducted. The first two investigated accounting for health and illness within a broad framework of accounts as "explanations"; as moral judgements and prescriptions; and as defining meaning. The third study focussed on the external/internal explanatory framework, and demonstrated that accounting is far more complex than the Wallston and Wallston (1981) "Health Locus of Control Construct' would suggest. Some accounts stressed "internality", some "externality", some a combination of both, and others viewed this construct as non-salient. These latter included accounts about personal autonomy, and, importantly, the 'medical model" account. In the thesis overall, among the accounts identified were ones based upon notions of : "the wonders of modern medicine"; "stress"; "the cultural critique'; 'a healthy lifestyle", 'tradition"; "individual autonomy", 'Theism'; and "Willpower". These accounts are assumed to operate both within individual subjectivity and popular discourse, offering people a variety of complementary 'texts' with which to weave narratives, drawing upon different 'texts" according to situational and other demands. Thus accounting is portrayed as an active, thoughtful and sometimes contradictory 'storymaking" activity, and people as competent negotiators of reality

The time has come for psychology to stop treating qualitative data as an embarrassing secret

Despite the sustained flourishing—both in terms of quantity and quality—of qualitative research in psychology, psychology's establishment ‘gatekeepers’ seem to still be wedded to the dogma that only experimental research and quantitative data are sufficiently robust to be taken seriously. In this paper we make the case against this contempt and call for qualitative research and data to be recognized as valid and epistemologically sound in its own right. Given that its ontology is based upon constructionist assumptions about the nature of the social world, its power to provide nuanced insight into the complexity of humankind is not a problem, but its greatest strength. Our paper therefore starts with a brief review of the ontological and epistemological differences between the two approaches to demonstrate that they are complementary rather than competition. We then make our case, based on two key strategies: first by shedding light on the fact that many (perhaps even most) of psychology's classic experimental studies actually collected qualitative data (in the form of debriefing interviews and the like) and used it to understand what was going on; and then by recent studies that have expressly sought feedback about the hypothesis being purportedly tested. We then recognize the extent to which contemporary researchers are expressing their frustration at the way that they are being forced into a methodological straight jacket, by carrying out their research in ways they view as inauthentic. We end with a call to kerb the methodological dogma that has taken hold of psychology, and to move to a more inclusive approach

Childhood in Sociology and Society: The US Perspective

The field of childhood studies in the US is comprised of cross-disciplinary researchers who theorize and conduct research on both children and youth. US sociologists who study childhood largely draw on the childhood literature published in English. This article focuses on American sociological contributions, but notes relevant contributions from non-American scholars published in English that have shaped and fueled American research. This article also profiles the institutional support of childhood research in the US, specifically outlining the activities of the ‘Children and Youth’ Section of the American Sociological Association (ASA), and assesses the contributions of this area of study for sociology as well as the implications for an interdisciplinary field.Yeshttps://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/manuscript-submission-guideline

Stories of childhood : shifting agendas of child concern

ix, 228 p. : il.; 23 cm

The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Reseach in Psychology

xxix, 631 p. : Ill.; 24 cm

A story of great expectations: Qualitative research in psychology in the Czech and Slovak Republics

In this article, we explore how social, cultural, and institutional contexts have influenced methodological choices in psychology research in the Czech and Slovak republics (C&SR). Thirty years since the collapse of communism in 1989, many qualitative psychologists are disappointed, feeling their hopes have not been fulfilled. In the current performance-oriented and measurement-obsessed academic milieu, it has become difficult to do in-depth qualitative research. Despite the broad integration of qualitative research into C&SR psychology, there has been only a modest increase in qualitative research getting published. Our article looks at the personal narratives of key figures in qualitative research in the C&SR and how these overlap with the overall narratives of social change in our countries and the epistemological changes in our science. The article draws on a conference panel discussion, interviews with key actors who have shaped qualitative research in C&SR, and our own experiences

A story of great expectations: Qualitative research in psychology in the Czech and Slovak Republics

In this article, we explore how social, cultural, and institutional contexts have influenced methodological choices in psychology research in the Czech and Slovak republics (C&SR). Thirty years since the collapse of communism in 1989, many qualitative psychologists are disappointed, feeling their hopes have not been fulfilled. In the current performance-oriented and measurement-obsessed academic milieu, it has become difficult to do in-depth qualitative research. Despite the broad integration of qualitative research into C&SR psychology, there has been only a modest increase in qualitative research getting published. Our article looks at the personal narratives of key figures in qualitative research in the C&SR and how these overlap with the overall narratives of social change in our countries and the epistemological changes in our science. The article draws on a conference panel discussion, interviews with key actors who have shaped qualitative research in C&SR, and our own experiences