The Self Between Cacophony and Monologue: A Conceptualization and Empirical Examination of Dialogical Complexity

0474290 - PSÚ 2018 RIV US eng J - Journal Article
Filip, Miroslav - Kovářová, Marie
The Self Between Cacophony and Monologue: A Conceptualization and Empirical Examination of Dialogical Complexity.
Journal of Constructivist Psychology. Roč. 30, č. 3 (2017), s. 270-294. ISSN 1072-0537. E-ISSN 1521-0650
Institutional support: RVO:68081740
Keywords : dialogical complexity * dialogical self theory * cognitive complexity * integrative complexity * personal position repertoire
OECD category: Psychology (including human - machine relations)
Impact factor: 0.889, year: 2017

Theory of dialogical self distinguishes between cacophonous, monological, and dialogical structure of the self. So far these structures have not been examined within systematic quantitative studies. Focusing on this issue, we conceptualized the three structures as degrees on a dimension of dialogical complexity. To assess dialogical complexity, we proposed a numerical index derived from the personal position repertoire and examined it empirically. We compared the index of dialogical complexity with indices of cognitive complexity (derived from the repertory grid technique), integrative complexity, and presence of dialogical relationships in narratives (both derived from the thematic apperception test). In our sample of a total of 60 nonclinical respondents, the index of dialogical complexity was not correlated with cognitive complexity. It was weakly negatively but significantly correlated with integrative complexity. Respondents who yielded a higher score of dialogical relationships in narratives formed the dialogical structure of the self according to the dialogical complexity index. Respondents who yielded less dialogical relationships in narratives obtained a wider range of dialogical complexity scores that indicated more cacophonous or monological structures. We conclude that the relationships with integrative complexity and with presence of dialogical relationships in narratives support the original conceptualization of dialogical complexity. However, due to limitations of the study, the results are not decisive, and further examination of dialogical complexity including clinical samples is needed.
Permanent Link: http://hdl.handle.net/11104/0271403