“To see a world in a grain of sand”: Towards Future-oriented What-If Analysis in Narrative Research

In this article, I explore narrative building blocks for future-oriented what-if (i.e., possibilities-generating) analysis developed in a health promotion study. The aim of this study was to gain insight into future possibilities for good health among participants known for their poor health status. In narrative inquiry, imagining future possibilities and prospective temporal orientation are seldom regarded as interesting for their own sake, despite ample attention to the role of temporality. The methodological reflection in this article is complemented with a discussion of ethical issues (regarding authorship and representation) in the proposed method of analysis

Futuring in Psychotherapie und psychologischer Beratung: Instrument zur Förderung von Resilienz

In diesem Artikel untersuchen wir, wie ein narrativer Ansatz in Bezug auf Futuring (Zukunftsvorstellung) als psychotherapeutisches Werkzeug verwendet werden kann, um die Resilienz zu steigern. Erstens theoretisieren wir die Beziehung zwischen Futuring und Resilienz, basierend auf nomothetisch-psychologischer Theorie und Forschung. Zweitens erweitern wir unsere Erkundung in die Bereiche des narrativen Futuring, welches konzeptionell mit der mehr personalisierten, bedeutungsorientierten Psychologie im Einklang steht. Wir erläutern das Verhältnis zwischen dem narrativen Futuring und der Resilienz mithilfe der kontinuierlichen Forschung an diesen Konzepten im Lebensgeschichten- Labor an der Universität Twente/ Niederlande. Wir schließen mit der Untersuchung der Möglichkeiten der Eingliederung des narrativen Futuring in die Psychotherapie

Ambiguities of ‘doing what works’:how professionals make sense of applying solution-focused support for people with intellectual disabilities

Objectives: Solution-focused support (SFS) is an upcoming approach to support people with intellectual disabilities (ID). However, while research shows that clients appreciate this approach, insight into professionals’ experiences and their application of SFS is lacking. This article describes a qualitative study aimed at understanding how professionals make sense of learning and applying SFS, specifically, Cauffman’s Solution Cube. Methods: Logbook files in which professionals reported their experiences with SFS for a full year were qualitatively analyzed in two steps: (1) identification of how professionals assigned successful and unsuccessful applications of SFS, and reflected on what worked and dilemmas arising during this application process, (2) identification of patterns over time in how professionals learned how to deal with the encountered dilemmas. Results: The main dilemma experienced by professionals concerns ‘doing what works’ in conjunction with other dimensions of the Solution Cube. Three overall patterns were identified to address how professionals made sense of learning how to apply SFS over time and deal with ambiguities of ‘doing what works’ in practice: (1) a focus on caring, (2) a focus on empowering, and (3) a focus on balancing between the two. Conclusions: Understanding how professionals deal with SFS over time enables researchers to identify different ways professionals learn SFS, along with the ambiguities they experience about the approach and unintended applications. Implications for implementing SFS and learning facilitators that might help promote a balance between caring and empowerment, specifically for people with ID, are provided