Jonathan Potter and Margaret Wetherell are significant figures in the field of discourse analysis, particularly known for their development of Discursive Psychology (DP). Their work emphasizes the role of language in constructing psychological phenomena and social realities, moving away from traditional cognitive approaches to psychology. Discursive Psychology focuses on how psychological states, identities, and social interactions are constructed through discourse, rather than treating them as pre-existing internal states.
1. Key Concepts Introduced by Potter and Wetherell
Discursive Psychology (DP)
Discursive Psychology, as developed by Potter and Wetherell, is an approach that examines how psychological phenomena—such as thoughts, emotions, and identities—are constructed, negotiated, and displayed in everyday language. Unlike traditional psychology, which often treats these phenomena as internal cognitive processes, DP views them as products of social interaction and discourse.
Relevance to Discourse Analysis:
- Focus on Social Construction: DP emphasizes that what we often consider to be psychological “facts” are actually constructed through language in social contexts. For example, instead of seeing “attitudes” as stable, internal states, DP examines how people construct and negotiate attitudes in conversation.
- Language as Action: In DP, language is not just a tool for expressing thoughts or emotions; it is an action that people use to achieve specific social functions, such as persuading, blaming, justifying, or excusing.
Example: In a conversation about a controversial topic, like climate change, DP would analyze how participants construct their opinions and emotions through language, and how these constructions serve to position themselves in relation to others in the conversation (e.g., as knowledgeable, skeptical, concerned).
Interpretative Repertoires
Interpretative repertoires are relatively stable sets of terms, descriptions, and metaphors that people use to make sense of the world and communicate with others. These repertoires are shared within a culture and provide a toolkit for constructing versions of reality in discourse.
Relevance to Discourse Analysis:
- Cultural and Social Resources: Interpretative repertoires highlight how people draw on culturally available linguistic resources to construct meaning in discourse. By analyzing these repertoires, discourse analysts can uncover the underlying assumptions and values that shape how different topics are discussed.
- Variability in Discourse: Potter and Wetherell emphasize that people can shift between different repertoires depending on the context and their communicative goals, revealing the flexibility and strategic use of language.
Example: In discussions about parenting, one interpretative repertoire might frame parenting as a “natural instinct,” while another might describe it as a “skill to be learned.” Analyzing these repertoires can reveal how different people construct and justify their views on parenting practices.
Construction and Function of Discourse
Potter and Wetherell emphasize that discourse is both constructed and constructive:
- Constructed: Discourse is made up of various linguistic elements, such as words, phrases, and metaphors, that are chosen and arranged in specific ways to convey meaning.
- Constructive: Discourse actively constructs social realities, identities, and relationships. It doesn’t just reflect reality; it shapes it.
Relevance to Discourse Analysis:
- Analyzing Construction: In discourse analysis, this approach involves examining how language choices contribute to the construction of specific versions of events, identities, or social issues.
- Analyzing Function: It also involves understanding the function of these constructions—how they are used to achieve specific social outcomes, such as persuading others, managing impressions, or justifying actions.
Example: In workplace meetings, managers might construct a narrative of “teamwork” and “collaboration” to foster a sense of unity and shared goals. Analyzing this discourse can reveal how these concepts are constructed and the functions they serve in maintaining organizational culture.
Rhetorical and Discursive Strategies
Potter and Wetherell explore how people use rhetorical strategies in discourse to make their arguments more persuasive, to manage accountability, or to position themselves favorably in a conversation.
Relevance to Discourse Analysis:
- Rhetorical Devices: This includes the use of rhetorical questions, contrasts, metaphors, and other linguistic tools that enhance the persuasiveness or credibility of a statement.
- Managing Stake and Interest: DP examines how people manage their own stake and interest in discourse—how they present themselves as objective, unbiased, or authoritative, for example.
Example: In a political debate, a speaker might use rhetorical strategies to frame their opponent’s policy as “extreme” or “unreasonable” while positioning their own as “balanced” and “practical.” DP would analyze how these strategies are employed to influence the audience’s perception.
2. Methodological Approach
Potter and Wetherell’s approach to discourse analysis is characterized by several key methodological principles:
- Focus on Naturally Occurring Data: They emphasize the importance of analyzing discourse as it naturally occurs in everyday conversations, media, or institutional settings, rather than relying on artificial or experimental data.
- Micro-Level Analysis: DP involves a close, detailed analysis of the language used in specific interactions, focusing on how discourse is constructed and what functions it serves in that context.
- Context Sensitivity: While focusing on the micro-level details of discourse, DP also takes into account the broader social and cultural contexts that shape and are shaped by the discourse.
Example: In studying how people talk about mental health, DP might analyze conversations between patients and therapists, looking at how different interpretative repertoires (e.g., “mental illness as a chemical imbalance” vs. “mental illness as a personal struggle”) are used, and what social functions these repertoires serve in the context of therapy.
3. Contributions and Impact
Potter and Wetherell’s work has made several important contributions to discourse analysis:
- Challenging Cognitive Psychology: By focusing on discourse rather than internal mental states, they challenged traditional cognitive psychology’s assumptions, offering a more socially grounded understanding of psychological phenomena.
- Introducing Flexibility in Discourse: Their concept of interpretative repertoires highlights the flexibility of language use, showing how people can shift between different ways of talking about the same issue depending on the context.
- Integrating Social and Psychological Dimensions: DP bridges the gap between social and psychological analysis, demonstrating how individual psychology is intertwined with social practices and cultural norms.
4. Criticisms and Challenges
While Discursive Psychology has been influential, it has also faced some criticisms:
- Overemphasis on Language: Critics argue that DP sometimes overemphasizes the role of language, potentially neglecting other important factors, such as material conditions or non-verbal communication, that also shape social interactions.
- Relativism: DP’s focus on the constructed nature of reality has led to accusations of relativism, with some critics suggesting that it downplays the importance of objective truth or material realities.
- Complexity in Analysis: The detailed, micro-level focus of DP can make the analysis complex and time-consuming, which may limit its practical application in some contexts.
Conclusion
Jonathan Potter and Margaret Wetherell have made significant contributions to discourse analysis through their development of Discursive Psychology. Their work emphasizes the importance of understanding psychological and social phenomena as constructed and negotiated through language. By introducing concepts like interpretative repertoires and focusing on the constructive and functional aspects of discourse, they have provided valuable tools for analyzing how language shapes our understanding of the world. Despite some criticisms, their approach remains influential in both discourse analysis and psychology, offering deep insights into the interplay between language, thought, and social interaction.
Frequently Asked Questions.
Jonathan Potter and Margaret Wetherell are influential figures in discourse analysis, particularly known for developing Discursive Psychology (DP). Their work focuses on how psychological states, identities, and social realities are constructed through language and social interaction, rather than treating them as pre-existing internal states.
Discursive Psychology, developed by Potter and Wetherell, examines how psychological phenomena like thoughts, emotions, and identities are constructed and negotiated through language in social contexts. Unlike traditional psychology, which often views these phenomena as internal cognitive processes, DP treats them as products of discourse and social interaction.
In DP, language is seen as a form of social action rather than just a tool for expressing thoughts or emotions. Language is used to achieve specific social functions, such as persuading, justifying, or excusing behavior. This perspective shifts the focus from what language represents to what it does in social contexts.
Interpretative repertoires are culturally shared sets of terms, descriptions, and metaphors that people use to make sense of the world and communicate with others. They are important because they reveal the underlying assumptions and values that shape how different topics are discussed. People can shift between different repertoires depending on the context, showing the flexibility of language use.
In discussions about parenting, one interpretative repertoire might frame parenting as a “natural instinct,” while another might describe it as a “skill to be learned.” Analyzing these repertoires reveals how different people construct and justify their views on parenting, depending on the cultural and social resources they draw from.
Potter and Wetherell emphasize that discourse is both constructed (composed of chosen linguistic elements) and constructive (actively shaping social realities, identities, and relationships). Discourse doesn’t just reflect reality; it helps to create it. Analysts study how these constructions are used to achieve specific social outcomes, such as persuasion or impression management.
Rhetorical and discursive strategies involve the use of linguistic tools to make arguments more persuasive, manage accountability, or position oneself favorably in a conversation. These strategies include rhetorical questions, contrasts, and metaphors, and are used to influence how others perceive the speaker’s statements and intentions.
The methodological approach of DP involves:
Focus on Naturally Occurring Data: Analyzing everyday conversations, media, or institutional discourse as they naturally occur.
Micro-Level Analysis: Closely examining language use in specific interactions to understand how discourse is constructed and its functions.
Context Sensitivity: Considering the broader social and cultural contexts that shape and are shaped by discourse.
Potter and Wetherell’s contributions include:
Challenging Traditional Psychology: By focusing on discourse rather than internal mental states, they provided a socially grounded understanding of psychological phenomena.
Highlighting Flexibility in Discourse: Their concept of interpretative repertoires shows how language use is adaptable and context-dependent.
Integrating Social and Psychological Dimensions: They bridged the gap between social and psychological analysis, emphasizing how individual psychology is intertwined with social practices and cultural norms.
Critics of DP argue that:
Overemphasis on Language: DP may focus too much on language, neglecting other factors like material conditions or non-verbal communication.
Relativism: DP’s emphasis on the constructed nature of reality has led to accusations of relativism, suggesting it downplays the importance of objective truth or material realities.
Complexity in Analysis: The detailed, micro-level focus of DP can make analysis complex and time-consuming, limiting its practical application in some contexts.
Discursive Psychology has influenced modern discourse analysis by providing tools to understand how language shapes psychological and social realities. It has shifted the focus from internal cognitive processes to the social construction of identity, attitudes, and emotions through discourse, making it a valuable approach in both discourse analysis and psychology.