This article stems from the statement that dialogical approaches to a study of the self face a double challenge: that of developing a conception of the self that both avoids social reductionism and accounts for the stability of the self. In discussing this double challenge, we identify three much debated issues: (a) To what does the notion of "Alter" exactly refer? (b) How could we conceptualise the fact that Subject--Alter interactions are not only interpersonal but entail larger social entities, in particular institutions? (c)What importance should we attach to the materiality of objects? We discuss these three questions from two standpoints: that of linguistics and that of psychology, and illustrate our theoretical proposals with an analysis of an excerpt taken from a focus--group discussion. In conclusion, we argue that the dialogism of discourse provides us with some clues of the dialogicality of the mind, whereas the latter invites us to develop a theory showing the importance of interactions in the construction of the self, to pay more attention to the transpersonal dimension of the social, and to consider that the material world contributes to the construction of the self.
Interaction analysis is not a prerogative of any discipline in social sciences. It has its own history within each disciplinary field and is related to specific research objects. From the standpoint of psychology, this article first draws upon a distinction between factorial and dialogical conceptions of interaction. It then briefly presents the basis of a dialogical approach in psychology and focuses upon four basic assumptions. Each of them is examined on a theoretical and on a methodological level with a leading question: to what extent is it possible to develop analytical tools that are fully coherent with dialogical assumptions? The conclusion stresses the difficulty of developing methodological tools that are fully consistent with dialogical assumptions and argues that there is an unavoidable tension between accounting for the complexity of an interaction and using methodological tools which necessarily "monologise" this complexity.
BackgroundMultiple barriers to knowledge translation in medicine have been identified (ranging from information overload to abstraction of models), leading to important implementation gaps. This study aimed at assessing the suggestions of practicing physicians for possible improvements of knowledge translation (KT) effectiveness into clinical practice.MethodsWe used a mixed methods design. French- German- and Italian-speaking general practitioners, psychiatrists, orthopaedic surgeons, cardiologists, and diabetologists practicing in Switzerland were interrogated through semi-structured interviews, focus group discussions, and an online survey.ResultsA total of 985 physicians from three regions of Switzerland participated in the online survey, whereas 39 participated in focus group discussions and 14 in face-to-face interviews. Physicians expressed limitations and difficulties related to KT into their daily practice. Several barriers were identified, including influence and pressure of pharmaceutical companies, non-publication of negative results, mismatch between guidelines and practice, education gaps, and insufficient collaboration between research and practice. Suggestions to overcome barriers were improving education concerning the evaluation of scientific publications, expanding applicability of guidelines, having free and easy access to independent journals, developing collaborations between research and practice, and creating tools to facilitate access to medical information.ConclusionsOur study provides suggestions for improving KT into daily medical practice, matching the views, needs and preferences of practicing physicians. Responding to suggestions for improvements brought up by physicians may lead to better knowledge translation, higher professional satisfaction, and better healthcare outcomes.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12961-016-0120-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
In recentyears, the notion of communication contract has stimulated a lot of research in social developmental psychology as well as in education. This articlepresents two series of investigations using different methods for the study of the didactic and experimental contracts. The discussion focuses on some theoretical issues raised by these studies: the risk of sociological vs psychological reductionism, the risk of neglecting the specificity of cognitive activity and the risk of reifying the notion of context. Possible developments for future research will be suggested The problem of the articulation between social, institutional and interactional contexts in the study of cognitive activity is a central argument.In this article, the role of socio-cognitive processes at work in the construction of knowledge will be examined by considering how individuals construct an object of discourse in a culturally marked situation and how they negotiate meanings in the immediate interaction in which they are involved. Situations characterized by sequences of questioning acts about specific objects will be under focus. The concepts of 'experimental contract' and 'didactic contract', which account for the joint construction of answers in test and didactic situations, will be central to our considerations.This article is divided into four sections. In the first section the theoretical background of our contextual and interactionist approach will be presented. In the second one, a brief theoretical definition of the notion of 'contract' will be given and two series of investigations with differing methods and objectives will be reported. In the third section, a few theoretical We would like to thank the Swiss National Research Foundation (FNRS) for grants 10-1977.86, 1.738-0.83. and 11.28561·90 to Anne-Nelly Perret-Clermont and M. L. Schubauer-I.eoni, which sustained several of the studies presented in this chapter.
This article focuses on the ways in which a flash glucose monitoring system, FreeStyle Libre®, is introduced and used by people living with type 1 diabetes, their relatives and healthcare professionals. It draws on a multi-sited ethnography in a variety of clinical and daily situations, and on interviews with caregivers and people living with diabetes. We explore how the users develop knowledge-in-practice, and consider the use of self-management technologies to be largely dependent on locally grounded and situated care acts, and resulting from the relational, pragmatic and creative maneuvering of technology-in-practice. Our findings show that adjustments between users, their bodies and the technology are required, and show the reflexive work and practices of patients and relatives who learn to use the device in a proper way. Moreover, we reveal that practitioners see this technology as a tool that not only improves self-care practices but also clinical practices, and that wearing and using this new medical device may become a moral injunction for self-improvement. Our results illustrate the techno-social reconfigurations at work and the development of new ways of feeling, thinking and acting in diabetes (self-) care.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.