How can we understand socially constituted selfhood? H. Hermans has addressed this question with the notion of the Dialogical Self that he draws from the philosopher Mikhail Bakhtin. We focus on Bakhtin’s discussion of realism in relation to how he has been interpreted by Hermans. This notion of realism (which we coined ‘‘expressive realism’’) highlights how sociality is inseparably related to embodied experience, thus making way for a sociocultural psychology that takes into account life as it is experientially lived. We point out how Hermans’ vision of the Dialogical Self neglects such embodied experience. This discussion leads to the claim that Bakhtin sees the self as social insofar as our most primary embodied experience is social, where Hermans anchors the sociality of self in inter-subjective exchange. Accordingly, an extension of the Dialogical Self is offered through discussion of these points.

No abstract

Postmodern critique has found its way into the psychology of self largely by way of Gergen's form of social constructionism. This view treats self as socially constructed and changeable, such that a notion like faithfulness to oneself, which is generally thought to belong in the domain of a true core self, is rendered futile. However, Mikhail Bakhtin offers a view of embodied and lived self that expands social constructionist work. It offers a way to think about faithfulness to oneself while not undermining the importance of sociality. This approach enables us to account for the experiential compellingness -which is currently missing in constructionist theorizing -that is bound up with self. The paper first discusses dialogue to show how Bakhtin inspires an understanding of how community shapes the embodied self in a way that calls for a return to the notion of faithfulness to oneself. Then the notion of authorship is addressed in order to show how he could inspire a way of thinking about self-creation (authoring individual self) and the concomitant struggle experienced in being faithful to one's self.

Analytic thought has been implicated in reduction of religious belief on the premise that intuitive cognitive systems facilitate religious belief and conscious inhibition encourages rejection of religious beliefs. Inherent in these studies are priming techniques to induce analytic thinking, resulting in reductions of religiosity and/or religious beliefs. The present study empirically reexamined the impact of priming analytic thought on intrinsic religiosity. In 2 randomized controlled experiments, we found little difference in intrinsic religiosity in control compared to analytic thinking prime conditions. When analytic thinking was primed, results were either unrelated to intrinsic religiosity or in opposite directions from those in previous research. Analytic thought primes led to higher intrinsic religiosity. All analyses statistically controlled for demographic characteristics. Our results suggest the relationship between analytic reasoning and intrinsic religiosity is more complex than previously suggested and establishes the importance of individual demographic characteristics for religiosity. Future research should engage measures that capture the nuances associated with religiosity.

In Discourse & Society, there has been discussion of accounting practices involving refugees, racism, and ethnicity. Some of these articles note that discursive psychology's emphasis on in-situ constructions leads to a situation where it does not allow us to fully grasp social discourses. This article addresses this critique by discussing conversation analysis and ethnomethodology. It then adds to this discussion by proposing that linguistically constituted phenomenological experience -a topic important in reference to refugees, racism, and ethnicity -is also bypassed by discourse analysis. It draws upon Mikhail Bakhtin's early work and on how experience is bound to social discourse. By proposing how Bakhtin meshes with Garfinkel and conversation analysis, it is possible to approach experience using techniques put forward by these perspectives. The result is a proposed way to research social discourse and experience, thereby enhancing discursive analysis.