Premium
Reflexive research and the grounding of analysis: Social psychology and the psy‐complex
Author(s) -
Parker Ian
Publication year - 1994
Publication title -
journal of community and applied social psychology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.042
H-Index - 63
eISSN - 1099-1298
pISSN - 1052-9284
DOI - 10.1002/casp.2450040404
Subject(s) - reflexivity , subjectivity , psychoanalytic theory , epistemology , objectivity (philosophy) , sociology , opposition (politics) , discursive psychology , context (archaeology) , social constructionism , social psychology , psychology , discourse analysis , psychoanalysis , social science , linguistics , philosophy , paleontology , politics , political science , law , biology
Abstract This paper is concerned with reflexivity in research, and the way research is grounded in the operations of the psy‐complex in social psychology. A central argument is that qualitative research in general, and a focus on reflexivity in particular, requires theoretical grounding. Distinctions are drawn between ‘uncomplicated subjectivity’, ‘blank subjectivity’ and ‘complex subjectivity’; and the analytic device of the ‘discursive complex’ is described. It is argued that such theoretical grounding can usefully draw on developments in discourse analytic, deconstructionist, and psychoanalytic social research. The opposition between objectivity and subjectivity is deconstructed, and psychoanalytic conceptual reference points for an understanding of the discursive construction of complex subjectivity in the context of institutions are explored with particular reference to the location of the researcher in the psy‐complex. The paper discusses the reflexive engagement of the researcher with data, and the construction of the identity of the researcher with reference to professional bodies. An analysis of a document produced by the British Psychological Society is presented to illustrate conceptual issues addressed in the first sections. This illustrative analysis is designed to show how the material is structured by a series of six discursive complexes, and that the institutional structure facilitates, and inhibits, certain forms of action and reflection.