EBSCO Publishing Citation Format: APA (American Psychological Assoc.

):
NOTE: Revie the instructions at htt!:""su!!ort.ebsco.com"hel!"#
int$ehost%lang$%&eature'i($APA an( ma)e any necessary corrections be&ore using. Pay
special attention to personal names, capitalization, and dates. Alays consult your library
resources &or the e*act &ormatting an( !unctuation gui(elines.
Re&erences
+c,eo(- ..- % Balamoutsou- S. (/001). Re!resenting narrative !rocess in thera!y: 2ualitative
analysis o& a single case. Counselling Psychology Quarterly- 9(/)- 1/.
3455A((itional 6n&ormation:
Persistent lin) to this recor( (Permalin)): htt!:""search.ebscohost.com"login.as!*#
(irect$true%(b$ehh%A7$0189/9:/;1%site$ehost5live
En( o& citation55<
Section:
RESEARC= REPOR>
REPRESENTING NARRATIVE PROCESS IN THERAP! "#A$ITATIVE ANA$SIS
O% A SING$E CASE
A&STRACT 6n recent years- there has been increasing interest in an a!!roach hich vies
counselling an( !sychothera!y as being concerne( ith giving clients o!!ortunities to articulate-
e*amine an( re5author as!ects o& their li&e5stories. =oever- most o& the literature associate(
ith this a!!roach has been base( on observations o& clinical !ractice- an( there is a nee( to
(evelo! more systematic research in this area. >he !resent stu(y uses ?ualitative metho(s to
i(enti&y an( categori@e (i&&erent ty!es o& narrative events occurring in thera!y (iscourse. A
re!resentation is o&&ere( o& the !rocess by hich e*!erience is narrativi@e( (uring thera!y. >he
(ata &or this analysis is (ran &rom an intensive stu(y o& one session o& !erson5centre(
counselling. >he issues involve( in a!!lying this metho( o& ?ualitative analysis are (iscusse(-
an( the im!lications o& these &in(ings &or research an( !ractice are outline(.
>he i(ea that !eo!le ma)e sense o& an( communicate their e*!erience through storiesA that e
live in a Bstorie( orl(B- has become increasingly in&luential ithin the social sciences. Bruner
(/0;1) has argue( that narrative re!resents a (istinctive Bay o& )noingB ?uite (i&&erent &rom the
theoretical- !ro!ositional or B!ara(igmaticB )nole(ge that historically has been the stoc) in tra(e
o& the scienti&ic community. >he im!lications o& narrative ays o& )noing have been articulate(
in the or) o& Cergen (/0;;)- +ishler (/0;1)- Pol)inghorne (/0;;)- Sarbin (/0;1) an( Riessman
(/00D)- an( in the later ritings o& Bruner (/008- /00/) himsel&. >his Bnarrative turnB has also
ma(e an im!act on the &iel( o& !sychothera!y. E(elson (/00D)- Omer (/00Da-b)- Parry % Eoan
(/00F)- Penn % Fran)&urt (/00F)- Scha&er (/0;8- /00:)- S!ence (/0;:)- Russell (/00/)- Russell
% Gan (en Broe) (/00:) an( Hhite % E!ston (/008) have been in the vanguar( o& a groing
grou! o& thera!ists ho have come to see themselves as !rovi(ing o!!ortunities &or clients to Bre5
authorB their lives.
I! to no the (evelo!ment o& a narrative !ers!ective on thera!y has been largely base( in
clinical observation. >here has been relatively little systematic research into the role an( &unction
o& narrative !rocesses in !sychothera!y. >he main !rogramme o& research that has been carrie(
out in this area has been con(ucte( by ,ubors)y an( his colleagues (,ubors)y % Crits5
Christo!h- /008A ,ubors)y- Barber % Eiguer- /00:A ,ubors)y et al.- /00F). >hese researchers
have create( a &rameor) &or analysing the structure an( content o& stories tol( by the client in
thera!y. Each narrative event- or story- consists o& three elements- a ish or intention on the !art
o& the !rotagonist- &olloe( by a res!onse by another !erson or !ersons- an( then &inally the
res!onse or reaction o& sel&. >here is also a set o& categories &or co(ing the (i&&erent ty!es o& ish
an( reaction being e*!resse(. Also o& relevance is hether the story has a !ositive or negative
outcome. For ,ubors)y- this scheme enca!sulates the Bcore con&lictual relationshi! themesB being
enacte( in the clientBs li&e. 6n a number o& stu(ies- ,ubors)y an( his grou! have shon that these
relationshi! stories change over the course o& success&ul !sychothera!y.
Hhile the Core Con&lictual Relationshi! >heme metho( has ma(e a maJor contribution toar(
un(erstan(ing the role o& narratives in !sychothera!y- it only e*amines one as!ect o& narrative
!rocess. Other researchers have attem!te( to inclu(e other (imensions o& narrative in their
a!!roaches. Russell et al. (/00D) have constructe( a &rameor) &or co(ing three levels o&
narrative organi@ation: structural connecte(ness- re!resentation o& subJectivity- an( com!le*ity.
>he notion o& structural connecte(ness arises &rom research in cognitive an( (evelo!mental
!sychology- hich has (emonstrate( that in(ivi(uals (at least- in(ivi(uals in (ominant Hestern
cultural grou!s) are better able to un(erstan( an( remember stories that &ollo a se?uence such
as Bsetting5initiating event5internal res!onse5attem!t5conse?uence5reactionB (Stein % Clenn-
/0K0). >his )in( o& Bstory grammarB com!rises a causally connecte(- tem!orally or(ere(
se?uence o& events that constitute a ell5roun(e( an( com!lete story.
Re!resentation o& subJectivity- the secon( (imension o& the Russell et al. (/00D) mo(el- re&lects
the i(ea that a story communicates not Just a series o& events- but also conveys in&ormation about
the !oint o& vie o& the teller. For e*am!le- a story can be tol( in the !resent or !ast tense- in the
&irst or thir( !erson- an( so on. As Brunet (/0;1) !uts it- one o& the )ey &unctions o& stories is to
convey the Blan(sca!e o& consciousnessB o& the narrator.
>he thir( (imension o& the Russell et al. (/00D) mo(el is that o& com!le*ity. Stories can vary
accor(ing to the lengths o& sentences- (ensity o& a(Jectival an( a(verbial (escri!tors- an( other
linguistic variables. 6t is li)ely that these &actors are im!ortant in !sychothera!y. As Russell et al.
(/00D) suggest- Bi& clients tell truncate(- s!arse narratives ith little (egree o& conce!tual
variation an( linguistic com!le*ity- thera!ists not only might note the clientBs reluctance to reveal
(etails but also might on(er about the !ossible !overty o& the clientBs e*!erience an( lac) o&
!sychological min(e(nessB (!. DF:). So &ar- this category system only a!!ears to have been
a!!lie( to the analysis o& transcri!ts o& sessions o& chil( !sychothera!y- in one stu(y. >his stu(y
(Russell- et al.- /00D) also yiel(e( a &urther &eature o& narrative !ro(uction in thera!y: the (egree
o& attunement o& the thera!ist to the clientBs narrative. >his (imension as &oresha(oe( in their
co(ing scheme ithout being e*!licitly co(e(- but emerge( in their analysis.
Another system &or co(ing an( analysing narrative !rocesses in !sychothera!y (iscourse has
been (evelo!e( by Angus % =ar(t)e (/00F). >heir 7arrative Process Co(ing Scheme (7PCS)
re?uires that raters &irst (ivi(e thera!y transcri!ts into to!ic segments- (e&ine( as bloc)s o& te*t
that inclu(e both client an( thera!ist statements relating to (iscrete to!ic areas- themes or issues.
>hese to!ic segments are then &urther sub(ivi(e( an( co(e( in terms o& mo(es o& narrative
!rocessing. >hree ty!es o& narrative !rocessing are i(enti&ie(: &ocusing on e*ternal events-
&ocusing on internal e*!eriences- an( re&le*ive analysis. Hhen a narrative se?uence is !rimarily
&ocuse( on e*ternal events- the thera!eutic (iscourse com!rises (escri!tive material recounting
Bhat ha!!ene(B. 6nternal se?uences occur hen the client or thera!ist articulates subJective
e*!eriences- &eeling states or emotional reactions. Finally- re&le*ive se?uences re!resent attem!ts
to un(erstan( or inter!ret the meaning o& events. 6n a stu(y com!aring transcri!ts &rom !oor an(
goo( outcome thera!ies- Angus % =ar(t)e (/00F) &oun( that !ositive outcomes ere associate(
ith higher numbers o& to!ic segments in each session- substantially higher &re?uencies o&
re&le*ive !rocessing- an( loer &re?uencies o& internal !rocessing se?uences.
>hese stu(ies have !ro(uce( systems &or analysing narrative !rocess in !sychothera!y that may
a!!ear ?uite (i&&erent. =oever- there are to broa( themes aroun( hich this or) can be seen
to converge. First- there is an interest in the se?uencing or structure o& stories tol( by clients.
Secon(- there is an em!hasis on the ay that clients tell their stories. =oever- there are also
some res!ects in hich these stu(ies ma)e ?uite (i&&erent assum!tions about the )ey (imensions
o& thera!eutic narratives. For e*am!le- only the ,ubors)y grou! ta)es into consi(eration the
content o& stories an( only Russell et al. (/00D) a((ress the interaction o& thera!ist an( client
mo(es o& story5telling. >he ,ubors)y an( Russell stu(ies (i&&erentiate beteen client an(
thera!ist narratives- hile Angus % =ar(t)e (/00F) or) ith to!ic segments co5constructe( by
client an( thera!ist.
=oever- although ,ubors)y- Russell et al. an( Angus % =ar(t)e have each (evelo!e(
somehat (i&&erent conce!tual &rameor)s &or analysing narrative !rocesses an( events in
!sychothera!y- all three research grou!s have a(o!te( a similar general research strategy- in
ta)ing the Bto!5(onB a!!roach o& o!erationali@ing their mo(els o& narrative !rocess through the
construction o& a co(ing manual hich is then a!!lie( by traine( raters to !ro(uce ?uantitative
measures o& the &re?uency o& occurrence o& relevant variables. >his strategy is basically
&oun(ationalist- an( has the aim o& (eriving a single reliable an( vali( e*!lanatory mo(el o& the
!henomenon un(er in?uiry.
An alternative strategy &or stu(ying narrative !rocesses in !sychothera!y is to a(o!t a ?ualitative
or human science a!!roach (Rennie- /00Fb). One (istinctive &eature o& human science research
is that it is avoe(ly inter!retivist an( constructionist- acce!ting that the meaning o& any event or
e*!erience is socially constructe(- ith (i&&erent inter!retations arising &rom the (i&&ering !oints
o& vie or interests o& (i&&erent rea(ers or observers. Another central tenet o& this a!!roach is that
it is (iscovery5oriente( in nature. >here oul( a!!ear to be goo( reason to a(o!t human science
!roce(ures at this stage in the (evelo!ment o& research into narrative !rocess in !sychothera!y.
Scholars &rom (isci!lines such as linguistics- social anthro!ology an( literary criticism have
alrea(y (emonstrate( the e*istence o& a vast array o& !otentially &ertile a!!roaches to the stu(y o&
narrative (see +artin- /0;1). >here oul( a!!ear to be much to be gaine( &rom a!!lying these
inter!retive &rameor)s to the !roblem o& un(erstan(ing the role o& narrative an( story5telling in
!sychothera!y.
>he !resent stu(y aims to (evelo! a ?ualitative or human science a!!roach to the i(enti&ication
o& narrative !rocesses in counselling or !sychothera!y (iscourse. Only Rennie (/00Fa) a!!ears
to have a!!lie( ?ualitative metho(s in research into storytelling events in !sychothera!y- but his
or) e*!lore( the clientBs e*!erience o& storytelling- hereas the !resent stu(y &ocuses only on
the analysis o& (iscourse re!resente( by transcri!ts o& thera!y sessions. >he !resent stu(y shoul(
be seen as a !recursor to &uture stu(ies in hich the te*t o& a thera!y session an( the clientBs
e*!erience o& that session might be ta)en together.
+E>=OE
>he metho(s em!loye( in this stu(y have been in&luence( by the or) o& Cee (/0;1- /00/)-
+ishler (/0;1- /00/) an( Riessman (/00D)- all o& hom em!hasi@e the im!ortance o& res!ecting
the integrity o& the hole narrative- rather than co(ing themes or categories across narratives.
>his a!!roach (i&&ers &rom the Bgroun(e( theoryB metho( o& ?ualitative analysis intro(uce( by
Claser % Strauss (/01K)- in or)ing ith &airly large segments o& te*t- rather than brea)ing
(on that te*t into constituent Bmeaning unitsB. >he choice o& metho(ology has also been
in&luence( by the case stu(y metho(s !ioneere( by +urray (/0D;) an( later re(iscovere( by
EeHaele % =arre (/0K1) an( Lin (/0;0)- in hich conclusions are base( on the stu(y o&
in(ivi(ual cases. >he &rameor) o& meaning yiel(e( by one case is teste(- articulate( an( re&ine(
through the stu(y o& subse?uent cases. Each case re!resents a stu(y in itsel&. >his research is also
in&orme( by an inter!retivist or social constructionist a!!roach- in hich a te*t is rea( an(
inter!rete( by co5researchers- not only to arrive at a consensus rea(ing here this might be
!ossible- but to generate alternative or con&licting inter!retations an( !ers!ectival richness
(Runyan- /0;8).
>he stu(y re!orte( here is centre( on a single session o& thera!y. >he client as a F95year5ol(-
(ivorce( male- Eutch stu(ent o& management science stu(ying at a British university. =e ha( no
!revious e*!erience o& thera!y. >he thera!ist (the !rinci!al author) as F:5years5ol(- male-
British an( !erson5centre( in orientation. >he client volunteere( to !artici!ate in a single session
o& thera!y- &or research !ur!oses. >he arrangements &or recruiting an( (e5brie&ing the client ere
han(le( by a co5researcher. >he session laste( &or 98 minutes- an( as ta!e5recor(e(. >he client
rate( the session as F on a &ive5!oint scale o& hel!&ulness- here / in(icates Bnot at all hel!&ulB
an( 9 in(icates Be*tremely5hel!&ulB- an( also re!orte( in a (e5brie&ing intervie that the session
ha( been a satis&actory an( use&ul e*!erience. >he client agree( a&ter the en( o& the session- an(
again some time later- &or the transcri!t o& the session to be use( in its !resent &orm.
>he session ta!e as transcribe( by both co5researchers- to ma*imi@e te*tual accuracy.
Folloing this- both researchers in(e!en(ently analyse( the material- ith the obJective o&
i(enti&ying as many narrative !rocesses as !ossible ithin the te*t- (raing on their !re5e*isting
un(erstan(ing o& narrative theory but also being o!en to ne an( emergent categories. >he co5
researchers then met to (iscuss their alternative rea(ings an( to (evelo! a collaborative
inter!retation.
One o& the most (i&&icult metho(ological issues &ace( in this stu(y as that o& (eci(ing ho to
re!resent the inter!retive &rameor) that as constructe( aroun( this case. >he !roblem o& ho
to communicate ?ualitative &in(ings has been ac)nole(ge( by many riters in this &iel( (+iles
% =uberman- /00FA Riessman- /00D). Because o& s!ace restrictions- the analysis that &ollos
struggles to (o Justice to the com!le*ity o& narrative !rocess uncovere( in this session o& thera!y.
6t must be recogni@e( that the meaning o& these !rocesses arises &rom the meeting o& the rea(er
an( the te*t. As a result- one o& the intentions o& this !a!er is to ma)e it !ossible &or the rea(er to
get access to enough o& the te*t to be able to ma)e u! their on min(s about hat it might mean.
RESI,>S
>his re!resentation o& a thera!y session ill !rimarily &ocus on &ive main ty!es o& narrative
!rocess that emerge( &rom the ?ualitative analysis (escribe( above: embe((e(ness- co5
construction- narrative tensions- !oint o& vie an( narrative mar)ers. Folloing (escri!tion an(
(iscussion o& these narrative elements- a sense o& ho they o!erate together ill be conveye(
through a summary statement.
6n the analysis- the term BnarrativeB ill be use( to re&er to the thera!eutic (iscourse as a hole-
an( the term BstoryB ill re&er to accounts o& s!eci&ic inci(ents. >he thera!eutic narrative- then- is
viee( as an attem!t by the client to Bnarrativi@eB a !roblematic e*!erience through the
!ro(uction o& a series o& stories connecte( by lin)ing !assages an( thera!ist interventions.
Embe((e(ness
One o& the &eatures o& this session that &orcibly struc) both co5researchers as its thematic unity.
All o& hat the client sai( a!!eare( to be a story he tol( about a s!eci&ic set o& e*!eriences that
ere &amiliar to him. Although through the session there ere &ive clearly i(enti&iable (iscrete
stories o&&ere( by the client (an( one o&&ere( by the thera!ist)- they ere all !art o& a more
general narrative about sel&. >he core o& this narrative as !resente( in the &irst minutes o& the
session. >able 6 (is!lays the o!ening statements o& client an( thera!ist. >he !henomenon o&
narrative embe((ing can be seen in this segment. >he client begins (lines F50) ith a brie&
!roblem statement- Min some situations 6 am not able to tell my close &rien(s my &eelings . . . .
because 6 thin) i& 6 tell them hat 6 &eel . . . . that might hurt them an( they might not be my
&rien(s any longer . . . . an( its uncom&ortableM. >his story is a straight&orar( e*am!le o& the
)in( o& con&lictual relationshi! theme narrative i(enti&ie( by ,ubors)y % Crits5Christo!h (/008).
>he ish o& the client is to e*!ress &eelings- but the antici!ate( reaction o& others oul( be
reJection- resulting in a reaction o& sel& o& (iscom&ort.
>he client then buil(s on this highly schematic story by o&&ering a more (etaile(- elaborate(
version- hich he intro(uces as an Be*am!leB: Mto ee)s ago one o& my &rien(s calle( me &rom
=ollan(. . .M >his Be*am!leB is a com!le* narrative- hich is at &irst somehat (i&&icult to &ollo.
=oever- !art o& its meaning lies in its relation to the !revious story- an( so it can be seen as
embe((e( ithin a more general narrativi@ation o& e*!erience that ha( alrea(y been set in
motion.
6nitially- hen the session ta!e as transcribe( it as !re!are( in the &orm (is!laye( in >able 6.
He &oun( it much easier to un(erstan( hat the client as saying hen e a(o!te( the
!roce(ures suggeste( by Cee (/0;1- /00/) an( re5cast the story into a stan@a &orm- as in >able 66.
>his techni?ue essentially involves ta)ing account o& s!eech rhythms an( !auses an( using this
ty!e o& in&ormation to (is!lay the story in a &orm that enables the rea(er to !artici!ate more
rea(ily in the story as it as actually tol(. >his a!!roach (ras u!on the cultural ca!acity to
re!resent e*!erience through !oetry (Cee- /0;1- /00/A +ishler- /00/A +inami % +cCabe- /00/A
Richar(son- /00:A Riessman- /00D). >his metho( o& (is!laying the story ma)es its meanings
much more trans!arent. 6n !articular- it allos the rea(er to a!!reciate the ay that the story
buil(s u! to a signi&icant moment o& sel&5re&lection on the !art o& the client: B6 &eel she &orces meB.
>his !oer&ul statement about his sense o& sel&5in5relation- hich as sai( ith &eeling- as
embe((e( ithin a sca&&ol(ing o& meaning !rovi(e( by the story. 6t as as though- to use
SarbinBs (/0;0) i(ea- the story serve( as vehicle to ta)e the narrator &rom one &eeling state to
another.
From this !oint- a series o& a stories- some initiate( by the client an( some by the thera!ist- buil(
on an( e*ten( the meanings intro(uce( in these o!ening stories. >he summary titles o& these
stories are !resente( in >able 666.
Co5construction
Any story that is tol( is a relational event. A story im!lies an au(ience- an( the nature o& the
au(ience ill have an im!act on the ay the story is tol(- an( on hat is sai( or not sai(. 6n this
!articular thera!y session ere &oun( e*am!les o& (i&&erent ays in hich the thera!ist
&unctione( not merely as an au(ience but as an active co5constructor o& the story.
For e*am!le- the em!athic re&lections o&&ere( by the thera!ist varie( in terms o& their narrative
com!leteness- an( a!!eare( to invite the client to atten( to certain as!ects o& the story rather than
others. 6n >able 6- &or instance- the thera!ist statement (lines /85/D) inclu(es to narrative
elements that ha( been !resente( by the client- M6 am not able to tell my close &rien(s my
&eelingsM an( Mthey might not be my &rien(s any longerM- but omits to re&lect bac) the thir(-
Mreaction o& sel&M- statement about Mits very uncom&ortable to &eel li)e thatM.
Another ay in hich the thera!ist actively engage( in the construction o& the narrative as
through an intervention that can be (escribe( as Bthera!ist5as5chorusB. 6n this ty!e o& thera!ist
statement- the thera!ist e*!resse( strong a&&irmation an( a!!roval regar(ing one element o& the
clientBs narrative. An e*am!le o& Bthera!ist5as5chorusB occurre( Just a&ter the o!ening e*changes
(is!laye( in >able 6. 6n >able 6G- in saying Blet me (o it my ayB an( B(onBt !ush meB- the thera!ist
a!!eare( to be s!ea)ing- in e&&ect- on behal& o& the client or as the client. >he client- at the same
time- as e*!ressing agreement through murmurs an( ByeahB an( BrightB.
A thir( category o& co5construction as Bthera!ist narrative elaborationB- hich consiste( o&
occasions hen the thera!ist actively suggeste( or searche( &or &urther meanings im!licit in a
narrative element that ha( !reviously been o&&ere( by the client. >here ere many e*am!les o&
this !rocess &oun( throughout the te*t.
A &ourth thera!ist narrative manoeuvre coul( be (escribe( as Bthera!ist5!rovi(e( metanarrativeB.
6n these statements- the thera!ist a!!eare( to be (raing on his es!ouse( theoretical mo(el
(Rogerian"!erson5centre()- an( o&&ering some !art o& this &rameor) as an inter!retive
&rameor) to the client. For instance- later in the session- a&ter the client ha( s!o)en very vivi(ly
about his &ears o& hat oul( ha!!en i& he e*!resse( his anger- the thera!ist sai(: Bmy vie is
that anger an( hate an( all these sorts o& &eelings are normal reactions- an( its ON to e*!ress
themM.
>hese &our categories o& thera!ist engagement in the !ro(uction o& the narrative55em!athic
re&lection o& narrative elements- thera!ist5as5chorus- thera!ist narrative elaboration an( thera!ist5
!rovi(e( metanarrative55can all be viee( as ty!es o& thera!ist intervention. =oever- the
thera!ist also a!!eare( to !artici!ate in hat +ishler (/0;1) has calle( the BJoint construction o&
meaningB by actually being the to!ic o& the story being tol( by the client. 6n other or(s- some o&
the clientBs narrative can be inter!rete( as being not so much communicating his e*!erience o&
(i&&iculties ith his &rien( in =ollan( an( his i&e- but his e*!erience o& being ith the thera!ist.
For e*am!le- the o!ening statement o& the client- M6 am not able to e*!ress my &eelings
because . . . . Mcoul( be inter!rete( as an antici!ate( story o& hat oul( ha!!en in the ne*t 98
minutes o& the thera!y session.
7arrative tensions
>he narrativi@ation o& e*!erience engage( in by this client a!!eare( to be structure( aroun(
tensions or contrasts. One o& the main tensions as beteen the clientBs sense o& ho he as an(
his goal o& ho he oul( li)e to be. Bruner (/00/- !. FK) observes that one crucial &eature o&
narrative is that it Bs!eciali@es in the &orging o& lin)s beteen the e*ce!tional an( the or(inaryB.
Peo!le have ell5&orme( e*!ectations regar(ing ho a !erson oul( BnormallyB act in s!eci&ic
situations. Stories o&ten recount occasions hen there as some )in( o& tension beteen hat
Bshoul(B have ha!!ene( or hat oul( BnormallyB ha!!en- an( hat (i( occur. Brunet (/008- !!.
F0598) suggests that Bthe &unction o& the story is to &in( an intentional state that mitigates or at
least ma)es com!rehensible a (eviation &rom a canonical cultural !atternB. >he hole narrative
co5constructe( by client an( thera!ist in this session can be viee( in this light. >he client
believes that- or(inarily- anyone oul( be able to e*!ress his or her &eelings to a close &rien(.
>he thera!ist shares this normative cultural belie&. >ogether- they search &or intentional states-
&orms o& action that the client can ac)nole(ge as his on- that oul( allo this tension to be
resolve(- an( that oul( com!lete the story (Higren- /00F). Euring the session- an array o&
client intentions an( &eeling states are teste( out: reliving a chil(hoo( e*!erience- avoi(ing
anger- (i&&iculties in (ealing ith !ressure- lac) o& assertiveness. =is story is re5tol( as a story o&
a hurt chil(- a story o& a man ho avoi(s anger- an( so on.
Point o& vie
>he subJectivity o& the client- his sense o& sel&5in5relation- as communicate( through a variety
o& narrative !rocesses. >he segment o& narrative (is!laye( in >able 66- e*em!li&ies &our (i&&erent
!oints o& vie ithin one story. First- there is a straight&orar( &irst !erson recounting o& a story
about a set o& e*ternal events- as in M6 am going bac) to =ollan( in the mi((le o& Se!tember an(
e (eci(e( to share this &iat togetherM. Secon(- there are interru!tions to the story here the
narrator (is!lays a re&le*ive aareness o& the current situation- i.e. that there is in&ormation the
thera!ist nee(s to )no in or(er to ma)e sense o& the story. Statements such as M6 am a teacher.
Hell- 6 as a teacherM- are o& this ty!e. >hir(- as the story reaches its !ea) o& emotional intensity-
the client em!loys (irect s!eech- such as M(i( you ring this !erson#M an( M6 (onBt thin) 6 ill (o
thatM- as i& the !rotagonists in this con&lict ere acting it out in the room. Finally- the client
re&lects on the story as a hole in saying- at the en(- M6 &eel she &orces meM.
Hhat a!!eare( to be ha!!ening as that the client (i( not remain ithin a single !oint o& vie
&or more than a &e moments- at least (uring the story5telling events in this session. >hese
observations raise ?uestions about the ay that conce!t o& !oint o& vie is use( ithin narrative
research. Russell et al. (/00D) an( Angus % =ar(t)e (/00F) oul( a!!ear to regar( !oint o& vie
as (is!ositional- as a relatively stable characteristic or trait e*hibite( by the !erson. Our rea(ing
o& this case- hoever- suggests that these shi&ts in the clientBs !oint o& vie ere highly
signi&icant- an( re!resente( a )in( o& enactment o& his ay o& relating to others. >he !attern that
is e*hibite( through these shi&ts might tentatively be (escribe( as Bbeing activeB lea(ing to
Bintrusion o& the otherB &olloe( by Bre&lective sel&5!reoccu!ationB an( then Baiting to be
release("rescue( by the otherB. >his !attern as &oun( not only in the story about B6 am going
bac) to =ollan(. . .B but also in other stories recounte( in the session.
>he client himsel& re&lecte( on his sense o& his on subJective orl( through a meta!hor that he
!ro(uce( near the beginning o& the session- in hich he (escribe( himsel& as e*!eriencing (oors
closing insi(e him- an( not being able to get out once they ha( close(. >his meta!hor recurre( at
various !oints (uring the session- an( can be inter!rete( as another e*!ression o& his subJectivity
or !oint o& vie.
6t is orth noting that this client as s!ea)ing in hat as &or him a secon( language. 6t is
!ossible- there&ore- that shi&ts in linguistic style associate( ith !oint o& vie coul( be
attributable to mother tongue inter&erence. 6n !articular- (irect s!eech is easier to negotiate &or
secon( language s!ea)ers- an( the shi&t to (irect s!eech at moments o& emotional stress might
re&lect this.
A &inal comment that might be ma(e about the shi&ting !oints o& vie o& this client is that they
can also be viee( in terms o& hat as ha!!ening in the relationshi! beteen thera!ist an(
client. >he thera!ist- aare that this as a single session- as active an( sai( a lot- an( there is
every reason to believe that the client e*!erience( this behaviour as intrusive or aggressive. >hus
!oint o& vie can itsel& be seen as co5constructe(: the subJectivity being e*!resse( by the client
is a sel&5in5relation to the thera!ist.
+ar)ers
7arrative mar)ers are momentary verbal or nonverbal events or signals that serve to orient the
listener to im!ortant &eatures o& the narrative &lo. >hey hel! the listener to )ee! trac) o& hat is
going on. Hhile recogni@ing that this as!ect o& narrative analysis (eserves more (etaile(
attention- the !resent (iscussion ill attem!t no more than to in(icate brie&ly some o& the )in(s
o& mar)ers that ere observe(. One im!ortant category o& narrative mar)er as Bentering the
story orl(B (Loung- /0;1). >he client signalle( that he as about to o&&er a story through
!hrases such as B6 ant to tal) about a !roblemB or B6 can give you an e*am!leB or Bhen 6 as
youngB. >here ere also many Blinguistic mar)ersB- such as !auses an( gli(es- that !rovi(e(
structure an( em!hasis ithin stories. >he client use( a number o& Borientation mar)ersB- such as
re&erences to here an( hen something ha!!ene(. >hese orientation mar)ers a!!eare( to locate
stories ithin an overall li&e5history- an( also to in(icate an aareness o& the nee(s o& the listener
an( the in&ormation he oul( re?uire to ma)e sense o& a story. Finally- there ere hat e have
calle( Buni?ue outcomeB mar)ers. Hhite % E!ston (/008) suggest that- although clients may enter
thera!y ith B!roblem5saturate(B stories about (i&&icult situations in their lives- they ill also
have available to them stories about similar situations in hich they e*!erience( Buni?ue
outcomesB- here they ere able to co!e ell ith the same set o& (eman(s. >he client in the
!resent stu(y &re?uently !re&ace( stories by mentioning that these (i&&iculties ha!!ene( only Bin
some situationsB or BsometimesB- thus im!lying that other stories coul( be tol( about the
BsometimesB.
A REPRESE7>A>6O7 OF 7ARRA>6GE PROCESS 67 >=ERAPL: PRE,6+67ARL
FOR+I,A>6O7
>he analysis o& this single session o& thera!y o&&ere( above has se!arate( out (iscrete as!ects or
elements o& narrative !rocess. 6n an attem!t to communicate the inter5relate(ness o& these
elements- the &olloing summary re!resentation o& the role an( &unction o& narrative ithin this
single session o& !erson5centre( thera!y has been constructe(:
6n this thera!y session- the client as im!licitly invite( by the thera!ist to recount the story o&
some !roblematic area o& e*!erience. At various !oints in a session- the client narrativi@e( the
e*!erience by !resenting a summary- con(ense( version o& the story (an BabstractB)- an( by
o&&ering (iscrete situate( accounts that re!eate( the same story themes in alternative settings an(
relationshi!s. >he client locate( these s!eci&ic stories ithin his broa(er li&e5story5as5a5hole- by
using narrative mar)ers such as BhenB an( BsometimesB an( linguistic cues such as !auses an(
changes in voice ?uality. >he meaning o& these stories as transmitte( in a number o& ays.
First- the stories conveye( in&ormation about the !atterns o& thought an( action o& the client an(
those ith hom he as involve(. Secon(- the stories communicate( the ?uality o& subJective
e*!erience o& the client- &or e*am!le his sense o& agency- ca!acity to be aare o& the nee(s o&
others- an( structure o& &eeling. >hir(- the (ramatic nature o& the stories reste( on a set o&
tensions or contrasts conveye( by the story- such as the tension beteen the normal an( the
e*traor(inary- an( thus !resente( the listener ith the sense o& ambiguity or incom!leteness
hich the thera!eutic conversation as inten(e( to resolve. >hrough telling stories- the client
as striving to communicate to the other- in this case a thera!ist- salient as!ects o& his
e*!eriential orl(. An im!ortant &unction o& each story as to Bem!lotB emotion an( &eeling- to
locate a&&ective e*!erience in a conte*t o& situate( meaning.
>he thera!ist actively engage( in the co5construction o& the narrative. >he thera!ist encourage(
the client to tell the story- through cues in(icating interest an( involvement- an( through e*!licit
invitations to Bsay moreB or BcontinueB. >he thera!ist &ul&ille( a role as e(itor or (irector o& the
narrative by !aying attention to selecte( elements o& the story- by o&&ering Bre5ritesB o& !arts o&
the story- an( by lin)ing (i&&erent stories together by suggesting common themes. >he thera!ist
also &unctione( as a BchorusB. At these moments the thera!ist tal)e( as i& Bin the clientBs shoesB- an(
re!eate( bac)- ith emotional em!hasis an( (ramatic timing- the essential meanings conveye(
by the story. 6n res!on(ing to an( engaging ith the stories generate( by the client- the thera!ist
a!!eare( to be sensitive to structural as!ects o& narrative- &or e*am!le to the B!oint o& vieB or
BvoiceB conveye( by the story. >he thera!ist also !artici!ate( (irectly in the story- by being a to!ic
that the client tol( stories about.
>his thera!y session viee( as a hole com!rise( a series o& neste( or embe((e( stories- in
hich each story re&erre( bac) to- an( (re meaning &rom- earlier stories. ,ater stories in the
se?uence acte( as attem!ts to resolve the tension intro(uce( by the &irst story. On some
occasions- recurring meta!hors or images ere use( to lin) meaning across stories.
>his re!resentation o& narrative !rocess in !sychothera!y is (erive( &rom the analysis o& a single
case com!rising one session o& thera!y. ,ater cases ill enable con&irmation- elaboration-
(i&&erentiation an( correction o& this initial- !rovisional mo(el.
CO7C,IS6O7S
6t is necessary to be cautious in (raing conclusions &rom this case stu(y. 6t is ?uite !ossible that
some o& the narrative !rocesses that have been (escribe( may be uni?ue to this !articular client-
thera!ist or (ya(. 6t is certainly true that other narrative !rocesses ill be reveale( through the
stu(y o& other thera!y (ya(s. A more generali@able un(erstan(ing o& narrative !rocess must
aait the accumulation o& many other cases. >his stu(y can also be critici@e( on metho(ological
groun(s. Stiles (/00D) has !ro!ose( a set o& B?uality criteriaB &or ?ualitative research. One o& these
criteria is that analysis an( inter!retation shoul( be su&&iciently bac)e( u! by evi(ence. He have
&oun( this har( to achieve. >o have given a(e?uate e*am!les to have com!rehensively su!!ort o&
the conclusions (ran &rom the te*t oul( have re?uire( a boo)5length !resentation o& this
single case. Also- e &oun(- as co5researchers in&luence( by the same sources an( ty!es o&
e*!erience- that e ten(e( largely to agree over our rea(ings o& the te*t- an( thus (i( not manage
to generate the )in(s o& alternative inter!retations that e ha( originally ho!e( oul( strengthen
our account. He are by no means convince( that e have BseenB all the narrative !rocesses that
might be i(enti&iable ithin this transcri!t. >he !artici!ation o& other rea(ers coul( certainly
generate &urther insights.
7evertheless- there are some general !rinci!les an( rather broa( conclusions that seem Justi&ie(
in the light o& this stu(y. =aving ta)en a thera!y session that as in no ay !lanne( or inten(e(
as an e*am!le o& Bnarrative thera!yB- e &oun( that merely as)ing the ?uestions Bhat stories are
being tol( here#B an( Bho are these stories being constructe(#B (Riessman- /00D) o!ene( u! the
te*t to a (ee!er level o& a!!reciation an( un(erstan(ing. As Bruner (/0;1) !uts it- narratives are
vehicles &or e*!ressing the Blan(sca!e o& actionB an( Blan(sca!e o& consciousnessB o& the narrator.
Another (iscovery in this stu(y as that thera!eutic narratives are embe((e( or conte*tuali@e(-
an( are co5constructe(. 6t seeme( to us that the story began ith the very &irst or(s uttere( by
the client- an( that the meaning o& later stories as to a large !art constitute( through their
relation to earlier stories. At least in this session- later stories a!!eare( to be re5or)ings o&
earlier ones- or attem!ts to achieve narrative com!letion an( closure. +oreover- the narrative that
is !ro(uce( in a thera!y session is not sim!ly the clientBs story- but is a story5tol(5to5another5
!erson. 6n this session- the thera!ist as actively involve( in co5constructing the clientBs
narrativi@ation o& his e*!erience- by ma)ing a variety o& interventions that attem!te( e*!lore the
meanings being e*!resse( ithin the version o& the story that ha( been initially o&&ere( by the
client.
>he aim o& ?ualitative- human science research is to construct a re!resentation o& an area o&
human e*!erience an( action- a Blocal )nole(geB that !romotes un(erstan(ing ithin rea(ers at
a !articular historical an( cultural time an( !lace. >his re!resentation is- in this instance- a story
about ho !eo!le tell stories in !sychothera!y. >he aim is not to generate causal- la5li)e
generali@able !ro!ositions but to suggest &rameor)s &or ma)ing meaning an( ta)ing action.
Holcott (/00F) characteri@es the three stages o& ?ualitative research as com!rising (escri!tion-
analysis an( inter!retation. Eescri!tion is the tas) o& !ortraying the e*!erience or !henomenon
being stu(ie(. Analysis involves i(enti&ying !atterns an( themes across this material.
6nter!retation re?uires !lacing this emerging conce!tual &rameor) ithin broa(er intellectual
an( theoretical conte*ts. >he !resent stu(y is avoe(ly e*!loratory an( tentative- ith the
em!hasis on (escri!tion an( analysis rather than inter!retation. =oever- rea(ers ill have
!ic)e( u! in(ications o& the theoretical a!!roaches through hich e are seeing this material.
Our analysis o& narrative !rocesses an( events in !sychothera!y can be locate( theoretically
ithin the Bcultural !sychologyB movement attributable to Bruner (/008) an( articulate( ithin
the &iel( o& !sychothera!y by Hhite % E!ston (/008). 6n terms o& more &ocuse( mo(els o& ho
to un(erstan( hat ha!!ens hen !eo!le engage in story5telling to &acilitate thera!eutic change-
e can see that the BassimilationB mo(el (Stiles et al.- /008) an( Russell % Gan (en Broe)Bs
(/00:) mo(el o& narrative change have consi(erable inter!retive !oer.
>he &inal !oint that can be ma(e concerns the value o& being illing to a!!roach the tas) o&
narrative analysis &rom an aesthetic !oint o& vie. +air (/0;0) argues &or the creation o& a
B!oetics o& e*!erienceB- in hich e s!ea) &rom the orl( o& !sychothera!y rather than about that
orl(. From this !ers!ective- an essential tas) &or research is to ca!ture the meaning o& the
e*!erience o& thera!y- &or both client an( thera!ist. He believe that the techni?ues &or re5&raming
narrative in !oetic rather than !rosaic structures- (evelo!e( by Cee (/0;1- /00/) an( others-
!rovi(e a !oer&ul tool &or attaining this goal. >he a!!lication o& these metho(s ithin this stu(y
re!resent only a small beginning in this (irection.
Revise( version o& a !a!er (elivere( at Sym!osium on B+eanings in Psychothera!y:
Contributions o& >hree A!!roaches to =uman ScienceB (Chair: E. Rennie)- Society &or
Psychothera!y Research Con&erence- Iniversity o& British Columbia- Gancouver- Cana(a- .une
/009.
>AB,E 6 >ranscri!t o& beginning o& session
1 Therapist: Well, you can start wherever you want to, whatever
2 thing you want to talk about.
3 Client: Well, I want to talk about, um, one problem I am
struggling with !or a long time. In some situations I am not
" able to tell my close !rien#s . . . . my !eelings or e$press
my
% !eelings to them, because I think i! I tell them what I !eel
& like in this moment that might hurt them an# they might not be
' my !rien#s any longer. Its very uncom!ortable to !eel like
( that.
1) Therapist: *o, that . . . I can see that its not a general
thing.
11 Its in on particular occasions, you have strong !eeling or
12 emotion about something . . . an# you !eel that it woul# kin#
o!
13 #rive them away.
1 Client: I can give you an e$ample. Two weeks ago one o! my
1" !rien#s calle# me !rom +ollan#. I am going back to +ollan#
1% again in the mi##le o! *eptember an# we #eci#e# to rent this
1& !lat together an# share this !lat together. ,ow, when I was
1' in +ollan# I was talking to her an# mentioning to her -where
1( can I !in# some work.- an# -I #on-t know where I can !in#
2) work-. *o I-m not /uite sure where I can !in# work an# what
21 I can #o. Then she mentione# she knows a person who was a
22 teacher in a school. I am a teacher. Well, I was a teacher.
23 I can ring this person an# I can ask her i! I coul# have some
2 hours o! teaching. 0n# I sai# I can #o that. Then I came back
2" here an# a couple o! weeks ago she calle# me an# aske# me
-#i#
2% you ring this person. an# I sai# -no- an# I have this
2& !eeling . . . eeerh . . . why can-t she not let it happen in
my way,
2' to let it happen !or mysel!. Why #oes she !orce me to #o that.
2( I coul#n-t say to her -I really appreciate your concern but
3) !rankly I #on-t like, I #on-t think I will #o that-. 1ecause
31 I have this !ear that she might re2ect me then. *o I #i#n-t
32 tell her that. I !eel she !orces me.
>AB,E 66 Client story in stan@a &orm: B6 &eel she &orces meB
Two weeks ago
3ne o! my !rien#s calle# me !rom +ollan#
I am going back to +ollan# again
In the mi##le o! *eptember
0n# we #eci#e#
To rent this !iat together
0n# share this !iat together
When I was in +ollan#
I was talking to her
0n# mentioning to her
-Where can I !in# some work.-
-I #on-t know where I can !in# work-.
I-m not /uite sure where I can !in# work
0n# what I can #o.
Then she mentione#
*he knows a person
Who was a teacher in a school
I am a teacher
Well, I was a teacher
I can ring this person
0n# I can ask her
I! I coul# have
*ome hours o! teaching
0n# I sai#
I can #o that
Then I came back here
0n# a couple o! weeks ago
*he calle# me an# aske# me
-4i# you ring this person.-
0n# I sai# -no-
0n# I have this !eeling
Why can-t she not let it happen in my way.
To let it happen !or mysel!.
Why #oes she !orce me to #o that.
I coul#n-t say to her: -I really appreciate your concern
but !rankly I #on-t think I will #o that-
1ecause I have this !ear
That she might re2ect me
*o I #i#n-t tell her that
I !eel she !orces me
>AB,E 666 ,in)e( stories ithin the overall narrative
Story 7o. / (Client) B>his is my !roblem. . . .B
Story 7o. : (Client) B>o ee)s ago one o& my &rien(s calle( me &rom =ollan(. . . .6 &eel she
&orces meB
Story 7o. D (Client) BHhen 6 as young an( ent to school they ha( a very authoritative ay o&
teaching. . . .B
Story 7o. F (Client) BOnce 6 as really angry ith my i&e- an( she reacte( by saying Mi& you get
angry ith me 6Bll Just leave youM. An( 6Bm letting it ha!!enB
Story 7o. 9 (>hera!ist) B+y D5year5ol( (aughter ha( a tantrum. . . .B
Story 7o. 1 (Client) B6 as tal)ing to a &rien( (about) i& 6 get a Job in a com!any. . . .B
>AB,E 6G E*am!le o& thera!ist5as5chorus
Therapist:
*o. . .what you were really wanting to say was:
-5et me #o it my way- 6Client: -yeah-7
-4on-t push me- 6Client: -right-7
RE%ERENCES
A7CIS- ,. % =ARE>NE- N. (/00F) 7arrative !rocesses in !sychothera!y- Cana(ian
Psychology- D9- !!. /085:8D.
BRI7ER- .. (/0;1) Actual +in(s- Possible Horl(s (Cambri(ge- +A- =arvar( Iniversity
Press).
BRI7ER- .. (/008) Acts o& +eaning (Cambri(ge- +A- =arvar( Iniversity Press).
BRI7ER- .. (/00/) >he narrative construction o& reality- Critical 6n?uiry- /;- !!. /5:/.
EEHAE,E- .. % =ARRE- R. (/0K1) >he !ersonality o& in(ivi(uals- in R. =ARRE (E(.)
Personality- !!. /;05:F1 (O*&or(- Blac)ell).
EEE,SO7- +. (/00D) >elling an( enacting stories in !sychoanalysis an( !sychothera!y:
im!lications &or teaching !sychothera!y- >he Psychoanalytic Stu(y o& the Chil(- F;- !!. :0D5
D:9.
CEE- ..P. (/0;1) Inits in the !ro(uction o& narrative (iscourse- Eiscourse Processes- 0- !!. D0/5
F::.
CEE- ..P. (/00/) A linguistic a!!roach to narrative- .ournal o& 7arrative an( ,i&e =istory- /- !!.
/95D0.
CERCE7- N... (/0;;) 6& !ersons are te*ts- in S. B. +ESSER- ,. A. SASS % R. ,. HOO,FO,N
(E(s) =ermeneutics an( Psychological >heory: 6nter!retive Pers!ectives on Personality
Psychothera!y an( Psycho!athology- !!. :;59/ (7e Brunsic)- 7...- Rutgers Iniversity
Press).
C,ASER- B. % S>RAISS- A. (/01K) >he Eiscovery o& Croun(e( >heory (Chicago- Al(ine).
,IBORSNL- ,. % CR6>S5C=R6S>OP=- P. (E(s) (/008) In(erstan(ing >rans&erence: >he
CCR> +etho( (7e Lor)- Basic Boo)s).
,IBORSNL- ,.- BARBER- ..P. % E6CIER- ,. (/00:) >he meanings o& narratives tol( (uring
!sychothera!y: the &ruits o& a ne observational unit- Psychothera!y Research- : !!. :KK5:08.
,IBORSNL- ,.- POPP- C.- ,IBORSNL- E. % +ARN- E. (/00F) >he Core Con&lictual
Relationshi! >heme- Psychothera!y Research- F- !!. /K:5/;D.
+A6R- +. (/0;0) Beyon( Psychology an( Psychothera!y: A Poetics o& E*!erience (,on(on-
Routle(ge).
+AR>67- H. (/0;1) Recent >heories o& 7arrative (6thaca- 7L- Cornell Iniversity Press).
+6,ES- +.B. % =IBER+A7- A.+. (/00F) 2ualitative Eata Analysis- :n( E(n. (7e Lor)-
Sage).
+67A+6- +. % +cCABE- A. (/00/) =ai)u as a (iscourse regulation (evice: a stan@a analysis
o& .a!anese chil(renBs !ersonal narratives- ,anguage in Society- :8- !!. 9KK5900.
+6S=,ER- E.C. (/0;1) Research 6ntervieing: Conte*t an( 7arrative (Cambri(ge- +A-
=arvar( Iniversity Press).
+6S=,ER- E.C. (/00/) Re!resenting (iscourse: the rhetoric o& transcri!tion- .ournal o&
7arrative an( ,i&e =istory- /- !!. :995:;8.
+IRRAL- =.A. (/0D;) E*!lorations in Personality: A Clinical an( E*!erimental Stu(y o& Fi&ty
+en o& College Age (7e Lor)- O*&or( Iniversity Press).
O+ER- =. (/00Da) 2uasi5literary elements in !sychothera!y- Psychothera!y- D8- !!. 90511.
O+ER- =. (/00Db) Short5term !sychothera!y an( rise o& the li&e5s)etch- Psychothera!y- D8- !!.
11;51KD.
PARRL- A. % EOA7- R.E. (/00F) Story Re5visions: 7arrative >hera!y in the Post5+o(ern
Horl( (7e Lor)- Cuil&or().
PE77- P. % FRA7NFIR>- +. (/00F) Creating a !artici!ant te*t: riting- multi!le voices-
narrative multi!licity- Family Process- DD- !!. :/K5:D:.
PO,N67C=OR7E- E.E. (/0;;) 7arrative Nnoing an( the =uman Sciences (Albany- 7L- State
Iniversity o& 7e Lor) Press).
RE776E- E.,. (/00Fa) Storytelling in !sychothera!y: the clientBs subJective e*!erience-
Psychothera!y- D/- !!. :DF5:FD.
RE776E- E.,. (/00Fb) =uman science an( counselling !sychology: closing the ga!-
Counselling Psychology 2uarterly- K- !!. :D95:98.
R6C=ARESO7- ,. (/00:) >he conse?uences o& !oetic re!resentation: riting the other-
reriting the sel&- in C. E,,6S % +. C. F,A=ER>L (E(s) 6nvestigating SubJectivity: Research
on ,ive( E*!erience- !!. /:95/DK (7e Lor)- Sage).
R6ESS+A7- C.N. (/00D) 7arrative Analysis (7e Lor)- Sage).
RI7LA7- H.+. (/0;8) Alternative accounts o& lives: an argument &or e!istemological
relativism- Biogra!hy- D- !!. :805::F.
RISSE,,- R.,. (/00/) 7arrative in vies o& humanity- science an( action: lessons &or cognitive
thera!y- .ournal o& Cognitive Psychothera!y- 9- !!. :F/5:91.
RISSE,,- R.,. % GA7 EE7 BROEN- P. (/00:) Changing narrative schemas in !sychothera!y-
Psychothera!y- :0- !!. DFF5D9F.
RISSE,,- R.,.- GA7 EE7 BROEN- P.- AEA+S- S.- ROSE7BERCER- N. % ESS6C- >.
(/00D) Analy@ing narratives in !sychothera!y: a &ormal &rameor) an( em!irical analyses-
.ournal o& 7arrative an( ,i&e =istory- D- !!. DDK5D18.
SARB67- >.R. (/0;1) >he narrative as a root meta!hor &or !sychology- in: >. R. SARB67 (E(.)
7arrative Psychology: >he Storie( 7ature o& =uman Con(uct- !!. D5:/ (7e Lor)- Praeger).
SARB67- >.R. (/0;0) Emotions as narrative em!lotments- in: +. .. PACNER % R. B.
AEE6SO7 (E(s) Entering the Circle: =ermeneutic 6nvestigation in Psychology- !!. /D15/KD
(Albany- State Iniversity o& 7e Lor) Press).
SC=AFER- R. (/0;8) 7arration in the !sychoanalytic (ialogue- Critical 6n?uiry- K- !!. :059D.
SC=AFER- R. (/00:) Retelling a ,i&e (7e Lor)- Basic Boo)s).
SPE7CE- E.P. (/0;:) 7arrative >ruth an( =istorical >ruth: +eaning an( 6nter!retation in
Psychoanalysis (7e Lor)- 7orton).
S>E67- 7.,. % C,E77- C.C. (/0K0) An analysis o& story com!rehension in elementary school
chil(ren- in: R. O. FREEE,E (E(.) A(vances in Eiscourse Processes: 7e Eirections in
Eiscourse Processing Gol. :- !!. /:K5/1F (7oroo(- 7.- Able*).
S>6,ES- H.B. (/00D) 2uality control in ?ualitative research- Clinical Psychology Revie- /D-
!!. 90D51/;.
S>6,ES- H.B.- E,,6O>>- R.- ,,EHE,L7- S.- F6R>=5COOE7S- ..- +ARC6SO7- F.-
S=AP6RO- E. % =AREL- C. (/008) Assimilation o& !roblematic e*!eriences by clients in
!sychothera!y- Psychothera!y- :K- !!. F//5F:8.
H=6>E- +. % EPS>O7- E. (/008) 7arrative +eans to >hera!eutic En(s (7e Lor)- 7orton).
H6CRE7- .. (/00F) 7arrative com!letion in the treatment o& trauma- Psychothera!y- D/- !!.
F/95F:D.
HO,CO>>- =.F. (/00F) >rans&orming 2ualitative Eata: Eescri!tion- Analysis an( 6nter!retation
(7e Lor)- Sage).
L67- R.N. (/0;0) Case Stu(y Research: Eesign an( +etho(s (7e Lor)- Sage).
LOI7C- N. (/0;1) >aleorl(s an( Storyrealms: the Phenomenology o& 7arrative (Eor(recht-
+artinus 7iJho&&).
PPPPPPPP
By .O=7 +c,EOE % SOP=6A BA,A+OI>SOI
Centre &or Counselling Stu(ies- Ee!artment o& A!!lie( Social Stu(ies- Neele Iniversity- IN
Corres!on(ence to: .ohn +c,eo(- Centre &or Counselling Stu(ies- Ee!artment o& A!!lie( Social
Stu(ies- Neele Iniversity- Neele- Sta&&or(shire S>9 9BC- IN.
Co!yright o& Counselling Psychology 2uarterly is the !ro!erty o& Routle(ge an( its content may
not be co!ie( or emaile( to multi!le sites or !oste( to a listserv ithout the co!yright hol(erBs
e*!ress ritten !ermission. =oever- users may !rint- (onloa(- or email articles &or in(ivi(ual
use.