Explorations in knowing: thinking psychosocially about legitimacy

Abstract

In this paper, we look at what engaging with psychoanalysis, through psychosocial accounts of subjectivity, has contributed to our struggles for legitimacy and security within our ways of knowing. The psychosocial, with its insistence on the unconscious and the irrational, features as both a source of security and of insecurity. We use three examples drawn from our own empirical research to explore the entanglement of the researcher with the researched and how this can offer a re-imagined sense of legitimacy for our work. In elaborating our argument, we discuss our experiences of 'being captured' by data and participants, and of negotiating the ethics of analysing participants' accounts.

The ambivalence of the psychosocial in Norwegian education. A policy document analysis

“…Cases of the latter partly use storytelling as a tool to establish a more encompassing form of scientific report, one that is rooted in subjective consciousness and embodied being-in-the-world (e.g. Kovinthan, 2016;Chappell et al, 2014;Hogan, 2019;Walsh, 2014;West, 2014). Among these qualitative works, psychoanalytical perspectives on school life are prominent, allowing for viewing social interaction as affected by individuals' past experiences (Chappell et al, 2014;Hogan, 2019;Walsh, 2014;West, 2014).…”

“…Kovinthan, 2016;Chappell et al, 2014;Hogan, 2019;Walsh, 2014;West, 2014). Among these qualitative works, psychoanalytical perspectives on school life are prominent, allowing for viewing social interaction as affected by individuals' past experiences (Chappell et al, 2014;Hogan, 2019;Walsh, 2014;West, 2014). This perspective is to make visible phenomena that otherwise would go unnoticed, such as affective expressions, and unconscious drives and desires.…”