Therapists' knowledge about climate change and competence in coping with it, validation of climate change-related emotions, and learning to manage these emotions were salient aspects of psychotherapy from the patients' perspective. Interviews were examined with interpretative phenomenological analysis (IPA). This was followed by analyzing accounts of psychotherapeutic processes to understand patients' experiences and outcomes. This article documents a study that involved engaging 10 Swedish adults who sought help for climate change-related emotional distress in in-depth conversations about their psychotherapeutic experience. Psychotherapists around the world report seeing more and more patients who report that they are experiencing distress due to climate change. These emergent phenomena are often referred to as "climate anxiety" or "climate depression" by the popular culture and by patients themselves. Simultaneously, these worries can also become a source of distress so severe as to impair everyday functioning and prompt someone to seek psychotherapy. We conclude by encouraging IPA researchers to embrace the interpretative opportunities that are offered by this approach.Ĭitizens' worries about climate change are often realistic and legitimate. The argument is illustrated by excerpts from our own research on relationship break-up. In order to situate our conclusions within a contextualist position, we draw upon concepts from Heideggerian phenomenology. We discuss the epistemological range of IPA's interpretative focus, and its relationship to the more descriptive features of phenomenological analysis. We, therefore, offer some thoughts on the basis of this relationship, and on its context within qualitative psychology. The methodological and conceptual bases for the relationship between these phenomenological and interpretative aspects of IPA appear to be underdeveloped in the literature. In this paper, we discuss two complementary commitments of interpretative phenomenological analysis (IPA): the phenomenological requirement to understand and ‘give voice’ to the concerns of participants and the interpretative requirement to contextualize and ‘make sense’ of these claims and concerns from a psychological perspective.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |