Narrative as a Root Metaphor for Political Psychology

Abstract

The idea of narrative has become increasingly appropriated in empirical research in both psychology and politics, yet there is a notable absence of integrative frameworks that specify a conceptual and methodological approach to narrative research in political psychology. An integrative conceptual framework is proposed and anchored in four principles of a narrative approach: (1) the mutual constitution of language and thought, (2) the need for personal coherence through narrative identity development, (3) the need for collective solidarity through shared meaning, and (4) the mediational property of narrative in social activity and practice. Theory and empirical research related to these principles are reviewed. We argue that a narrative framework has the potential to enhance the relevance and amplify the voice of political psychology within and beyond the academy and to offer new knowledge on the complex and dynamic relationship between context and mind.Since its emergence in the 1970s as a scholarly enterprise seeking to link politics, mind, and behavior, political psychology has struggled to find an anchoring paradigm. Horowitz (1979) argued that the sustenance of political psychology, and its ability to unify social science disciplines, would be determined by its ability to offer solutions to real political dilemmas. This sentiment is echoed in Barber's (1990) call for a progressive and relevant political psychology, as well as Winter's (2000) contention that political psychology must address the practical problems of real life. Both Horowitz (1979) and Smith (1979) suggested that the emergence of political psychology was directly connected to historical concerns and processes related to disciplinary structures. And Smith (1979, 1980) cautiously argued that political psychology might provide a multidisciplinary paradigm for the social and behavioral sciences through its commitment to an analysis of the mind in political context.In some ways, the lack of a coherent unifying paradigm within political psychology is related to the demands of continued disciplinary training for emerging scholars. Hence political psychologists trained primarily in political science might privilege rational choice theory over, say, social identity theory, because that paradigm is considered canonical to their disciplinary practice (e.g., Jervis, 1989). Yet the interdisciplinary nature of political psychology commands the development of conceptual frameworks that can cross borders in fields of knowledge production and, in the process, construct novel ways to approach political problems. In this article, we argue that a paradigm has begun to emerge which not only transcends disciplinary boundaries within the social sciences but also provides a bridge to the humanities. That paradigm is narrative.Calling upon social psychologist Ted Sarbin's (1986a) classic statement of narrative as a "root metaphor" for psychology, we argue that narrative represents an ideal root metaphor for political psychology in its ability to resolve the analyti...

Narrative, Identity, and the Politics of Exclusion: Social Change and the Gay and Lesbian Life Course

“…A growing movement across the social sciences has come to recognize the utility of a narrative approach to the study of lives in context (for review, see Hammack 2008;Hammack and Pilecki 2011;McLean 2008). The central tenet of this approach is the idea that humans make personal and social meaning by constructing stories that make experience sensible (Bruner 1990).…”

Personal, Master, and Alternative Narratives: An Integrative Framework for Understanding Identity Development in Context

“…These are not stories of individuals' lives (i.e., personal narratives), but are broad culture-specific stories that are available for individuals to potentially internalize and resist, both consciously and unconsciously. Narrative researchers have been discussing the concept of master narratives for many years and to great effect [e.g., Andrews, 2002;Bamberg, 2004;Cohler & Hammack, 2006;Fivush, 2010;Hammack, 2008Hammack, , 2011Hammack & Cohler, 2009;Hammack & Pilecki, 2012;Hatiboğlu & Habermas, 2015;McAdams, 2014;McLean, 2015;Weststrate & McLean, 2010]. However, the concept has been used in inconsistent ways, resulting in many questions about how to identify master narratives and how to apply them empirically to the study of individual psychological experiences.…”

Putting the Social into Personal Identity: The Master Narrative as Root Metaphor for Psychological and Developmental Science

“…In the language of Kuhn [1962], the idea of the master narrative became the paradigm through which we viewed our own scientific enterprise, and we hoped to stimulate others to see the value in this concept. In the language of Sarbin [1986], following Pepper [1942], we saw the master narrative as a root metaphor for not just psychological and developmental science, but for social science more broadly [Hammack & Pilecki, 2012].Thus it is with great enthusiasm that we comment upon the framework proposed here by McLean and Syed [this issue] -a framework that we are gratified to say has been heavily influenced by our ideas, as well as many others in the broader field of narrative psychology. In the remainder of this commentary, we highlight points of overlap and distinction between the two frameworks.…”