Caroline Howarth

A social representation is not a quiet thing: Exploring the critical potential of social representations theory

Following Moscovici (1972), this paper addresses the questions: What is the aim of research within a social representations perspective? Is it to support or to criticize the social order? Is it to consolidate or transform it? After a brief overview of social representations theory, I argue that while the theory appears to have the conceptual tools to begin this critical task, there are serious criticisms and points of underdevelopment that need addressing. In order for social representations theory to develop into a rigorously critical theory there are three controversial issues that require clarification. These are (a) the relationship between psychological processes and social practices, (b) the reification and legitimization of different knowledge systems, and (c) agency and resistance in the co-construction of self-identity. After discussing each issue in turn, with illustrations from research on racializing representations, I conclude the paper with a discussion of the role of representations in the ideological construction and contestation of reality.

A Review of Controversies about Social Representations Theory: A British Debate:

Since its inception more than forty years ago, social representations theory has been subjected to several criticisms, particularly within British discursive psychology. This paper reviews four major controversies that lie in the areas of (a) theoretical ambiguities, (b) social determinism, (c) cognitive reductionism and (d) lack of a critical agenda. A detailed discussion and evaluation of these criticisms reveals that while some can be regarded as misinterpretations, others need to be treated as serious and constructive suggestions for extending and refining the current theoretical framework. The main argument underlying this review is that many of the criticisms are based on the difficulty in understanding and integrating the complex, dynamic and dialectical relationship between individual agency and social structure that forms the core of social representations theory. Engaging with the critics is thus thought to provide clarification and to initiate critical dialogue, which is seen as crucial for theoretical development.

Towards a Social Psychology of Community: A Social Representations Perspective

Communities impinge into peoples lives: they orient the social construction of knowledge; they ground the negotiation of common identities; they marginalise and stigmatise certain social groups; they provide the tools for empowerment and social inclusion. For these reasons, I argue that communities are central to the social psychology of humankind. They have not, to date, been given the attention they deserve in the academic discipline of social psychology. A short account of the history of this discipline demonstrates that need for a paradigmatic shift and for a dialectical approach to community. I suggest that the theory of social representations offers the tools to explore the concept of community as a source of social knowledge, as a basis of common identities, and as a means in marginalisation and social exclusion. This reveals the potential of social representations to construct, delimit and empower the everyday experience of community, highlighting the status of community as a social creation that has acquired reality.

So, you're from Brixton? The struggle for recognition and esteem in a stigmatized community

This article examines how the struggle for recognition and esteem permeates everyday experiences in the context of young people growing up in Brixton, south London, UK. It begins with a brief history of Brixton and an explanation of the qualitative methods (focus groups and interviews) and thematic analysis used in the research. The findings are then discussed in three sections. The first section illustrates how identity is constructed through and against the representations held by others within particular social contexts. Focusing on the varying strategies that different young people adopt in constructing a positive identity reveals the salience of racist representations in the social construction of Brixton. The second section examines the effects this can have on the self-image and self-esteem of many in the study, looking in particular at strategies used to contest negative versions of blackness. This points to the racializing and gendering within the (re)production of local youth identities. The concluding section illustrates how some young people collaboratively develop the social and psychological resources to protect themselves against the prejudices of others. Together, this material reveals how social relationships and institutional cultures empower/disempower Brixtons youth in their collaborative struggle for recognition and esteem. This allows us to consider how new multicultures address, incorporate and resist new racisms and prejudices towards a locality.

Exploring the Potential of the Theory of Social Representations in Community-Based Health Research—and Vice Versa?

This article seeks to demonstrate the importance of developing a dialogue between social representations theory and community approaches to researching issues of health. We show how we have used the theory within our own research to ground our findings at the level of community. The article is divided into three sections: the recognition of competing systems of knowledge; the role of representations in maintaining stigmatizing practices; and the impact of representations on identities. Each section is illustrated with material drawn from Foster’s research on mental illness and Dorrer’s research on women’s representations of healthy eating. We conclude by arguing that, while social representations theory is a valuable tool for communitybased health research, the theory would benefit from developing a more participatory methodology.

Four problems for researchers using social categories

Research on lay categorization processes has revealed that it can lead to distortions. Yet researchers routinely categorize people into groups and cultures. We argue that researchers should be aware that social categories are (1) perspectival, (2) historical, (3) disrupted by the movement of people, and (4) re-constitutive of the phenomena they seek to describe. We illustrate these problems with reference to contemporary research on globalization and the “clash of cultures”. It is argued that problematizing cultural categories would do more to reduce inter-group conflict than reifying them.

How social representations of attitudes have informed attitude theories: the consensual and the reified

In this paper I discuss the importance of examining the impact of our common-sense making on the development of academic psychological constructs. In the process, I shall review the history of social psychology in understanding differences and similarities in the ways in which attitudes and social representations have been theorized. After a concise review of each of these two concepts, I examine the points of connection and tension between them, with particular reference to the dialectic of the social and the psychological. This highlights the influence of dominant constructions of the individual within the discipline of social psychology itself and on recent research in attitude theory in particular. The paper discusses how social psychologists have used, have been constrained by, and have developed particular social representations of the individual and of ‘attitudes’ themselves in the reified realm of academic psychology. By way of a conclusion, the example of racism is drawn on to reveal the conceptual and political consequences of theorizing either racist attitudes or racializing representations.

Using the theory of social representations to explore difference in the research relationship

This article explores how the question of difference can be addressed within the research relationship. The first part of the article analyses the consequences of difference in one particularly compelling research encounter where accusations of racism damaged the research relationship. The author argues that we need to examine the researcher-researched relationship in detail and investigate the recognition of difference that structures this relationship in order to analyse material drawn from research. The second part of the article shows how this may be done within a particular social psychological perspective - that of the theory of social representations. This enables an exploration into the relationship between what is said, who said it and to whom, or, in other words, an analysis of the relationship between representations emerging and identities being played out in the research context. The value of this approach is illustrated by studying an example from the author’s own research. The final part of the article demonstrates that difference in the researcher-researched relationship is not simply a problem of methodology but needs to be analysed as a feature of human relations. The article argues that an understanding of the relationship between social representations and identities illuminates the question of difference in qualitative research and demonstrates the value of difference.

'I hope we won't have to understand racism one day': researching or reproducing 'race' in social psychological research?

OBJECTIVES The efficacy of cognitive behaviour therapies for psychosis (CBTp) has been sufficiently established for its inclusion in some national treatment guidelines. However, treatment efficacy does not guarantee effectiveness in routine practice, where clinician expertise and patient mix may be different. Thus, we evaluated the applicability, acceptability and effectiveness of CBTp when offered routinely in a public mental health service. DESIGN A prospectively recruited representative sample (N=94) of patients with psychotic disorders from a geographic catchment area in Melbourne, Australia, was randomized to CBTp or treatment as usual. METHOD The CBTp intervention included psychoeducation, positive symptom, and co-morbid problem components. Therapists collaboratively negotiated goals with patients and utilized treatment components from a manual. Intention-to-treat analyses used data at baseline, 9 months and 18 months. RESULTS Working alliance and client satisfaction measures indicated excellent acceptability. Both groups improved to a similar degree on the Positive And Negative Syndrome Scale, with no advantage for the CBTp group. The most frequent CBTp components implemented were co-morbid disorders/personal issues and personalized psychoeducation; working with persisting symptoms was the main focus in relatively few sessions. CONCLUSIONS The lack of advantage for the CBTp group may be due to: the infrequent focus on positive symptoms (the most replicated outcome domain for CBTp); the unselected nature of the patients (rather than those with distressing symptoms or referred by clinicians); or, to insufficient therapist expertise.

Representations, Identity, and Resistance in Communication

Our identities, the ways we see and represent ourselves, shape how we communicate, what we communicate about, how we communicate with others, and how we communicate about others. Hence identity, representation, culture, and difference are all central to a Social Psychology of communication. Take the factor of culture, as addressed in Chapter 3: Germans and Greeks differ considerably in the amount of small talk in business discussions, which is seen by Greeks as important to building up relationships (Pavlidou, 2000). American English speakers tend to be talkative and inquisitive in conversations with people they do not know well, and relatively quiet in the comfort and intimacy of close relationships, while the reverse is true for Athabascan Indians (Tracy, 2002). Added to such cultural differences are communication patterns relating to gender (Duveen and Lloyd, 1986), religion (Miike, 2004), class (Skeggs, 1997), language and dialect (Painter, 2008), among others. What’s more, it is very difficult to untangle the intracultural nature of identity and how this impacts on communication (Martin and Nakayama, 2005). Hence communicative exchanges are ‘deeply cultural’, as ‘groups of people will speak and interpret the actions of those around them in patterned ways’ (Tracy, 2002, p. 34). One of the questions for a Social Psychology of communication is: Do these cultural patterns facilitate or obstruct communication? (See Box 7.1.)