A relational theory of self-deception

Moissinac, Luke

doi:10.1016/j.newideapsych.2006.03.001

Cited by 11 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 37 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Denial seems, in part, due to the experiential and relational properties of the self being perceived in the light of others. This analysis would appear then to link with Clegg and Moissinac (2005) proposal of a relational model of self-deception. They argue that the related concept of self-deception is not due to a fragmented psyche, but instead highlights the rhetorical properties of self-deception rather than on mental phenomenon.…”

mentioning

confidence: 88%

‘No-one in the world would ever wanna speak to me again’: an interpretative phenomenological analysis into convicted sexual offenders' accounts and experiences of maintaining and leaving denial

Blagden

Winder

Thorne³

et al. 2011

Psychology, Crime & Law

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

mentioning

confidence: 88%

‘No-one in the world would ever wanna speak to me again’: an interpretative phenomenological analysis into convicted sexual offenders' accounts and experiences of maintaining and leaving denial

Blagden

Winder

Thorne³

et al. 2011

Psychology, Crime & Law

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…A relational perspective is central to Clegg and Moissinac's (2005) conceptualization of self‐deception. In their view, the potential for self‐deception is located at the intersection of the multiple, ambiguous, and contradictory qualities of experience.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Such possibilities are premised on psychological and temporal partitioning that separate the two opposed beliefs in some ‘fragmented model of consciousness’ (Clegg & Moissinac, 2005). For example, the psychoanalytic approach conceptualizes self‐deception by engaging the notion of a dynamic unconscious.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In a shift away from locating self‐deception in individual consciousness, Clegg and Moissinac (2005) suggest that the discrepancies at the heart of self‐deception flow from the multiple and ambiguous qualities of experience rather than from fragmented consciousness. They contend that ‘it is the experiential world itself that is fragmented by the intersection of, and negotiation between, multiple unique experiential fields … within the larger experiential field that we call social or cultural’ (Clegg & Moissinac, 2005, p. 102). In this account, the possibility of self‐deception is located at the intersection of the multiple, ambiguous, and conflicting qualities of experience in a confusing and contradictory world of demanding responsibilities and relationships.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Self‐deception and the therapist: An interpretative phenomenological analysis of the experiences and understandings of therapists working with clients they describe as self‐deceptive

Westland

Shinebourne

2009

Psychol Psychother

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The concept of self-deception offered participants a perspective for describing and understanding clients who present a range of 'difficult' attitudes and behaviours, such as evasion and denial of the 'truth' of their predicament as understood by the therapist, conflicting, and contradictory attitudes to the process of self change, avoiding taking responsibility for themselves, lack of self-understanding, withholding from engagement in therapy, and from relationship with the therapist. The findings also bring to light therapists' experiences of discomfort, frustration and anger, and feelings of incompetence when working with clients they described as self-deceptive. The construct of client's self-deception constitutes one possible interpretation but other interpretative possibilities are considered.

show abstract

“…Although extensive, the literature on self-deception does not help for the above purposes. The concept of self-deception is still a subject of debate and the authors seem to be focused on the conceptual understanding of this phenomenon rather than on the implications of it for everyday life (von Hippel and Trivers, 2011;Clegg & Moissinac, 2005). In applied disciplines, however, very little attention has been paid to the manifestation of this phenomenon in spite of the obvious consequences of it on practice.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Self-deception in coaches: an issue in principle and a challenge for supervision

Bachkirova

2015

Coaching: An International Journal of Theory, Research and Prac

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article describes an exploratory study aimed at investigating factors contributing to the phenomenon of self-deception in coaches. Six experienced coaching supervisors were interviewed in accordance with the Conceptual Encounter research methodology. The results are presented in a model of self-deception in coaches. The model consists of three main sections, which include the nature of self-deception, contextual influences on self-deception and the focused influence on self-deception in coaching supervision. These themes are discussed in light of the structural analysis of the literature on self-deception performed from a pragmatic perspective. The paper concludes by considering how the results of the study add to current debates on the nature of self-deception and what implications the findings might have for coaches, coaching supervisors and other practitioners engaged in the development of individuals in organisations. Practice points • This article is relevant to all types of coaching and particularly to coaching supervision. • The article addresses the issue of self-deception of coaches that highlights the role of the practitioner's self in the coaching process and the potential implications of this phenomenon on the quality of practice. • The findings raise coaches' awareness of their self-deception and how to address it. Coaching supervisors and educators should be able to inform their practice using the proposed model.

show abstract

A relational theory of self-deception

Cited by 11 publications

References 37 publications

‘No-one in the world would ever wanna speak to me again’: an interpretative phenomenological analysis into convicted sexual offenders' accounts and experiences of maintaining and leaving denial

‘No-one in the world would ever wanna speak to me again’: an interpretative phenomenological analysis into convicted sexual offenders' accounts and experiences of maintaining and leaving denial

Self‐deception and the therapist: An interpretative phenomenological analysis of the experiences and understandings of therapists working with clients they describe as self‐deceptive

Self-deception in coaches: an issue in principle and a challenge for supervision

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About