The Dialogical Self as a Society of Mind

By H. Hermans. 2002

376 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Clinical Psychology, Social Psychology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/12d99689bcb1bbedca61f1e1eb6ef1ea233df301

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Clinical Psychology

1. Charles Fernyhough
2. S. McClelland
3. J. Valsiner
4. Phillip L. Hammack
5. S. Crafter
6. T. Cline
7. Guida de Abreu
8. L. O’Dell

In Social Psychology

1. Phillip L. Hammack
2. J. Valsiner
3. Charles Fernyhough
4. S. Crafter
5. S. McClelland
6. T. Cline
7. Guida de Abreu
8. L. O’Dell

Citations in the corpus

• Cultural Psychology Today: Innovations and Oversights (2009, background): “That person is therefore necessarily analyzable as a dynamic structure of multiple parts—such as the autonomous-relational self (Kagitçibasi, 1996, 2005), or in terms of the dialogical self (Hermans, 2001, 2002; Hermans & Dimaggio, 2007; Salgado & Gonçalves, 2007).”
• Getting Vygotskian about theory of mind: Mediation, dialogue, and the development of social understanding (2008, positive): “The dialogic nature of human subjectivity has formed the basis of an important theory of self-organisation (Hermans, 1996; 2002; Hermans & Kempen, 1993; 1995), and yet the cognitive-psychological implications of the dialogicality of human experience remain unexamined (Rochat, 2001).”
• The problem of interpretation in vignette methodology in research with young people (2012, methodology): “…work of Bakhtin has been taken up by many theorists who have developed understandings of dialogue and the relationship between socio-cultural accounts of the relationship between psychological functioning and dialogue (for example Skinner, Valsiner and Holland, 2001; Hermans, 2002, Wertsch, 1991).”
• Narrative and the Cultural Psychology of Identity (2008, background): “This dynamic interplay is recognized in conceptions of a “dialogical self” (e.g., Hermans, 2001, 2002; Hermans, Kempen, & van Loon, 1992; Holland et al., 1998), influenced by both Vygotsky (1978) and Bakhtin (1981).”
• THE CONSTRUCTION AND RECONSTRUCTION OF A DIALOGICAL SELF (2003, background): “This statement applies both to the relationship between parts of a society, and to the workings of the self as a “society of mind” (Hermans, 2002).”
• Who is the “Self” in Self Reports of Sexual Satisfaction? Research and Policy Implications (2011, result): “Holland et al. (2004) reported similar findings in their interviews with young women in which they found that young women defined their own sexual satisfaction in terms of a “general contentment with the relationship, in which her sexual satisfaction is limited or regarded as unnecessary” (p.”
• Researching “experience”: Embodiment, methodology, process (2011, background): “Taking the ‘dialogical self’ (Hermans, 2002) as her focus, Blackman interrogates the ways in which cultural shifts in notions of self may be aligned with forms of psychopathology.”