Researching Case Study: Is a critical hermeneutic appropriation of the practitioner’s case study notes a tool or a hindrance towards reflective therapeutic practice?

Hdl Handle:
http://hdl.handle.net/10142/90441
Title:
Researching Case Study: Is a critical hermeneutic appropriation of the practitioner’s case study notes a tool or a hindrance towards reflective therapeutic practice?
Authors:
Bager-Charleson, Sofie
Abstract:
What makes the psychotherapist’s interpretation ‘true’ or ‘false’? This study explores practitioner-research as a potential ‘reflective space’ for psychotherapists and counsellors with regard to their own interpretative frameworks. Practitioner-research (McLeod 1999) refers, here, to research relating to the practitioner’s own work, potentially lending practitioners an option of ‘reconstructing’ (McLeod 2001), their everyday practice. The study builds on Schon’s thinking on ‘reflective practitioner’ (Schon 1980) and ‘frame reflection’ (Schon 1994) with an interest in whether or not practitioners can afford to stand outside their immediately chosen frameworks, to examine their institutions and beliefs, as one among a number of possibilities. It is argued, here, that frame reflection is important in psychotherapy, as in other professions, such as politics or teaching; where practitioners enjoy considerable influence over other people’s meaning-making processes. Practitioner research is, here, explored with specific reference to case-study based research, as a possible means towards such frame-reflection. Ethical and methodological constraints are explored, with reference to the process of revisiting or ‘researching’ case studies, through the process of critical hermeneutic ‘appropriation’ (Ricoeur 1981). This process is illustrated with reference to the author’s own systematically kept records, from client work. The ethical framework for practitioner research, stressing the importance of direct benefits to clients (BACP/Bond 2004) is argued here to be biased towards collaborative practice, which may not be appropriate in case study research. Further, it is argued that the traditional refuge for psychotherapeutic research, in terms of natural sciences, prevents case study with its narrative nature, from establishing a firm base in research. This could be a loss: Researching case study records with reference to narrative inquiry, in general, and critical hermeneutic ‘appropriation’ in particular, is proposed to lend practitioners a space outside their immediate choice of tradition of practice, where they can consider their own meaning making processes, in addition to others’.
Issue Date:
2005
URI:
http://hdl.handle.net/10142/90441
Type:
Thesis
Language:
en
Appears in Collections:
UKCP Collection

Full metadata record

DC FieldValue Language
dc.contributor.authorBager-Charleson, Sofieen
dc.date.accessioned2010-01-22T15:18:20Z-
dc.date.available2010-01-22T15:18:20Z-
dc.date.issued2005-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10142/90441-
dc.description.abstractWhat makes the psychotherapist’s interpretation ‘true’ or ‘false’? This study explores practitioner-research as a potential ‘reflective space’ for psychotherapists and counsellors with regard to their own interpretative frameworks. Practitioner-research (McLeod 1999) refers, here, to research relating to the practitioner’s own work, potentially lending practitioners an option of ‘reconstructing’ (McLeod 2001), their everyday practice. The study builds on Schon’s thinking on ‘reflective practitioner’ (Schon 1980) and ‘frame reflection’ (Schon 1994) with an interest in whether or not practitioners can afford to stand outside their immediately chosen frameworks, to examine their institutions and beliefs, as one among a number of possibilities. It is argued, here, that frame reflection is important in psychotherapy, as in other professions, such as politics or teaching; where practitioners enjoy considerable influence over other people’s meaning-making processes. Practitioner research is, here, explored with specific reference to case-study based research, as a possible means towards such frame-reflection. Ethical and methodological constraints are explored, with reference to the process of revisiting or ‘researching’ case studies, through the process of critical hermeneutic ‘appropriation’ (Ricoeur 1981). This process is illustrated with reference to the author’s own systematically kept records, from client work. The ethical framework for practitioner research, stressing the importance of direct benefits to clients (BACP/Bond 2004) is argued here to be biased towards collaborative practice, which may not be appropriate in case study research. Further, it is argued that the traditional refuge for psychotherapeutic research, in terms of natural sciences, prevents case study with its narrative nature, from establishing a firm base in research. This could be a loss: Researching case study records with reference to narrative inquiry, in general, and critical hermeneutic ‘appropriation’ in particular, is proposed to lend practitioners a space outside their immediate choice of tradition of practice, where they can consider their own meaning making processes, in addition to others’.en
dc.description.provenanceSubmitted by Del Loewenthal (d.loewenthal@roehampton.ac.uk) on 2010-01-22T14:52:42Z No. of bitstreams: 0en
dc.description.provenanceApproved for entry into archive by Pat Simons(p.simons@roehampton.ac.uk) on 2010-01-22T15:18:20Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 0en
dc.description.provenanceMade available in DSpace on 2010-01-22T15:18:20Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 0 Previous issue date: 2005en
dc.language.isoenen
dc.subjectPsychotherapyen
dc.subjectCounsellingen
dc.subjectCase study notesen
dc.subjectCritical Hermeneuticsen
dc.titleResearching Case Study: Is a critical hermeneutic appropriation of the practitioner’s case study notes a tool or a hindrance towards reflective therapeutic practice?en
dc.typeThesisen
All Items in RURR are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.