In this paper we discuss the semiotic functions of the psychological borders that structure the flow of narrative processes. Each narration is always a contextual, situated and contingent process of sensemaking, made possible by the creation of borders, such as dynamic semiotic devices that are capable of connecting the past and the future, the inside and the outside, and the me with the non-me. Borders enable us to narratively construct one’s own experiences using three inherent processes: contextualization, intersubjective positioning and setting of pertinence. The narrative process – as a subjective articulation of signs in a contingent social context – involves several functions of semiotic borders: separation, differentiation, distinction-making, connection, articulation and relation-enabling. The relevant psychological aspect highlighted here is that a border is a semiotic device which is required for both maintaining stability and inducing transformation at the same time. The peculiar dynamics and the semiotic structure of borders generate a liminal space, which is characterized by instability, by a blurred space-time distinction and by ambiguities in the semantic and syntactic processes of sensemaking. The psychological processes that occur in liminal space are strongly affectively loaded, yet it is exactly the setting and activation of liminality processes that lead to novelty and creativity and enable the creation of new narrative forms.
Temporality is a fundamental dimension of each narrative process of meaning making. In fact, the narration constructs and organizes temporal frames that connect one’s own experiences. From this point of view, oncological illness is experienced as a traumatic experience that interrupts the sense of continuity of one’s own life, resulting in the configuration of different temporal frames, which are not always able to support the processes of elaboration of this experience. The aim of this article is to ex- plore the way the modal verbal predicates (must, can, will, know) are organized and work in relation to the representation of time in narrations of cancer patients. The modal verbal predicates—introducing the meanings of possibility, knowledge, will, desire, duty, need, or ability—allow us to organize the relationship between the subject, action, and context. Six narrations of cancer experience were analyzed—one for each time frame (linear, circular, fragmentary, static, cyclic, and spiral) proposed by Brockmeier (2000)—by means of quali-quantitative analysis of the use of modal verbs. Narrations show specific modal positioning: dispersion, plasticity, focusing, rigidity, and poverty. It is possible organize them along a continuum from plasticity to rigidity. The modal plasticity is the capacity to reconfigure a new temporal relation between subject and context, whereas modal rigidity shows a repetition of a specific and same modality in connecting subject and context. This preliminary research allows us to reflect about some possible clinical implications to support and foster processes of meaning making of cancer conditions
Within a semiotic and psychodynamic frame, we present and discuss the psychological construct of modal articulation. By modality, we mean the way a subject organizes the meaning of his/her own experience according to categories of necessity, possibility, opportunity, will, knowledge, permission, and duty. Modality is a relevant topic in some branches of philosophy, logics, linguistics, and semiotics, but there is no systematic discourse about it in psychology. The proposal of this work is to deal with some interesting and promising features of modal categories in the sensemaking process of subjective experience. Modalization is presented as a relevant semiotic organization in each contextual and dynamic sensemaking process in order to perform three functions: (a) connection between affective matrix and subjective experience, (b) mediation between subjective positioning in intersubjective context, and (c) vectorialization of action, namely orienting subjective agency in becoming temporal. Theoretical, methodological, and clinical implications are discussed.
BackgroundHereditary angioedema with C1-inhibitor deficiency (C1-INH-HAE) is characterized by recurrent edema of unpredictable frequency and severity. Stress, anxiety, and low mood are among the triggering factors most frequently reported. Impaired regulation and processing of emotions, also known as alexithymia, may influence outcomes. The aim of this study was to confirm the presence of alexithymia and stress in children with C1-INH-HAE, to determine whether they are also present in children affected by other chronic diseases, and to investigate their relationship with C1-INH-HAE severity. Data from children with C1-INH-HAE (n = 28) from four reference centers in Italy were compared with data from children with type 1 diabetes (T1D; n = 23) and rheumatoid arthritis (RA; n = 25). Alexithymia was assessed using the Alexithymia Questionnaire for Children scale; perceived stress was assessed using the Coddington Life Event Scale for Children (CLES-C).ResultsMean age (standard deviation [SD]) in the C1-INH-HAE, T1D, and RA groups was 11.8 (3.3), 11.7 (2.9), and 11.1 (2.6) years, respectively. Mean C1-INH-HAE severity score was 5.9 (2.1), indicating moderate disease. Alexithymia scores were similar among disease groups and suggestive of difficulties in identifying and describing emotions; CLES-C scores tended to be worse in C1-INH-HAE children. C1-INH-HAE severity was found to correlate significantly and positively with alexithymia (p = 0.046), but not with perceived stress. Alexithymia correlated positively with perceived stress.ConclusionsAlexithymia is common in children with chronic diseases. In C1-INH-HAE, it may result in increased perceived stress and act as a trigger of edema attacks. Comprehensive management of C1-INH-HAE children should consider psychological factors.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s13023-018-0871-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
In this paper I discuss the relevance of the single-case approach in psychological research. Based upon work by Hurtado-Parrado and López-López (Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science, 2015), who outlined the possibility that Single-Case Methods (SCMs) could be a valid alternative to Null Hypothesis Significance Testing (NHST), I introduce the idiographic approach (Salvatore and Valsiner Theory & Psychology, 20(6), 817-833, 2010; Valsiner Cultural & Psychology, 20(2), 147-159, 2014; Salvatore Culture & Psychology, 20(4), 477-500, 2014) based on the logic of abductive generalization, rather than the logic of inductive generalization. I present the theoretical, epistemological and methodological assumptions that this approach proposes; in particular, I discuss the re-conceptualization of some now obsolete rigid opposition, the inconsistency of sample use in psychological research, the relationship between uniqueness and general, the relationship between theory and phenomena, and finally the validation process.
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.