Personal Construct Psychology

Landfield, A. W.

doi:10.1007/978-1-4615-9125-2_5

Cited by 124 publications

(115 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

110

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Fiona no longer appeared stock at the 'anticipation' stage of what Kelly (1955) described as the Experience Cycle. Instead she was allowing herself to grow by engaging in activities which would contribute to the further testing out and development of her construct system (Landfield & Leitner, 1980). …”

Section: Session 10mentioning

confidence: 99%

Photography as a Measure of Constricted Construing: The Experience of Depression Through a Camera

Hanieh

Walker

2007

Journal of Constructivist Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Session 10mentioning

confidence: 99%

Photography as a Measure of Constricted Construing: The Experience of Depression Through a Camera

Hanieh

Walker

2007

Journal of Constructivist Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We now turn to the effect of the content of the constructs, as coded by Landfield's (1971) system, on the locating of the ideal self at the midpoint. As in Watson's (1998) classification of all clients' pre-treatment constructs, those concerning forcefulness and tenderness were highly represented, accounting for nearly half of the constructs concerned.…”

Section: Midpoint Ratings and Construct Contentmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…26% only completed one grid while 30% completed all five grids. All elicited constructs were categorized using Landfield's (1971) content categories. Ten percent of the constructs were also classified by an undergraduate…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Midpoint Ratings on Personal Constructs: Constriction or the Middle Way?

Winter

Bell

Watson

2010

Journal of Constructivist Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Midpoint ratings of elements on personal constructs have been given various interpretations, and the placement of the ideal self at the midpoint of a construct has been viewed as violating Kelly's (1955Kelly's ( /1991 Dichotomy and Choice Corollaries. This paper reports analyses, using a mixed models approach, of repertory grids completed by 80 clients referred to a clinical psychology service at up to five assessment points both preand post-therapy. A larger than expected number of ideal self ratings at the midpoint was found, and consideration of the content of several of the constructs concerned elucidated why it might have been that neither pole was preferred. Midpoint ratings of the ideal self increased over the course of therapy, and were not associated with depression or anxiety.Midpoint ratings of the ideal self and self now were also related to various structural measures of construing. Theoretical and clinical implications of the findings are discussed.Running Head: MIDPOINT RATINGS 3 Midpoint Ratings on Personal Constructs: Constriction or the Middle Way?A basic premise of personal construct psychology, enshrined in its Dichotomy Corollary, is that constructs are bipolar. The importance of this assumption is not least because of its implications for the personal construct view of choice and change. While there is some research evidence supportive of the bipolarity of construing (Bell, 2000;Bonarius, 1965; Millis & Neimeyer, 1991), other studies have challenged the view of constructs as strictly dichotomous (Epting, Suchman, & Nickeman, 1971;Mair, 1967;Riemann, 1990). Amongst the alternative suggestions are that constructs are unipolar (Bonarius, 1984;Riemann, 1990); that the contrast pole of a construct may be selected from a number of possible alternatives, and that as a result constructs may be -bent‖ (Yorke, 1983); and that some constructs may be more bipolar than others (Walker, Ramsey, & Bell, 1988).The bipolarity assumption was reflected in Kelly's original dichotomous method of repertory grid administration, in which the respondent was required to allocate elements (aspects of the person's world) to one or other pole of a series of constructs.However, the rating methods that are now much more commonly used allow investigation of the placement of elements not only at particular construct poles but also at other points on construct dimensions. One such point, which will be a primary focus of this paper, is the midpoint.Midpoint ratings of elements on constructs have been given various interpretations by personal construct theorists. For example, it has been suggested that such ratings can imply that the individual is unable to apply the constructs to the elements concerned (Fransella, Bell, & Bannister, 2004). A high number of midpoint ratings for an Running Head: MIDPOINT RATINGS 4 element would therefore imply that the element is relatively meaningless for the individual and, being outside the -range of convenience‖ (Kelly, 1955) of his or her construct system, is likely to be anxiety-p...

show abstract

“…This is recognized in formal logic, in that mode of transport subsumes land based vehicles, which subsumes automobiles, which subsumes sport utility vehicles, which subsumes four-passenger sport utility vehicles, and so on. Early grid studies such as those of (Hinkle, 1965), with his description of "laddering", and (Landfield, 1971), with his description of "pyramiding", have focused on the organizational qualities of construct systems.…”

Section: Repertory Grid Techniquementioning

confidence: 99%

Attributes of Identity Document Credibility: A Synthesis of Expert Knowledge

Henry¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Personal Construct Psychology

Cited by 124 publications

References 6 publications

Photography as a Measure of Constricted Construing: The Experience of Depression Through a Camera

Photography as a Measure of Constricted Construing: The Experience of Depression Through a Camera

Midpoint Ratings on Personal Constructs: Constriction or the Middle Way?

Attributes of Identity Document Credibility: A Synthesis of Expert Knowledge

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About