当前位置:
X-MOL 学术
›
The Sociological Review
›
论文详情
Our official English website, www.x-mol.net, welcomes your feedback! (Note: you will need to create a separate account there.)
Nonsuicidal self-injury and intersubjective recognition: ‘You can’t argue with wounds’
The Sociological Review ( IF 2.1 ) Pub Date : 2024-02-02 , DOI: 10.1177/00380261231221661 Peter Steggals 1 , Ruth Graham 1 , Steph Lawler 2
The Sociological Review ( IF 2.1 ) Pub Date : 2024-02-02 , DOI: 10.1177/00380261231221661 Peter Steggals 1 , Ruth Graham 1 , Steph Lawler 2
Affiliation
This article explores the relevance of intersubjective recognition and the ‘recognition theoretical turn’ to our understanding of nonsuicidal self-injury. While previous research has demonstrated that self-injury possesses an important social dimension alongside its intrapsychic characteristics, a major challenge for any social approach to self-injury has been to find a way to describe and analyse this dimension without reductively implying that self-injury is a form of ‘attention-seeking’, where this describes a pejorative accusation of social manipulation. One possible solution to this challenge lies in the concept of intersubjective recognition and the idea that what some have interpreted as ‘attention-seeking’ behaviour is perhaps better understood as recognition-seeking. As such, we draw on data from a 2016–2017 English pilot study to examine three basic questions: (1) does self-injury constitute, at least in some cases and amongst its many other observed intrapsychic and social functions, a form of recognition-seeking? (2) if so, how does self-injury work as a claim to recognition? and (3), how do we solve the apparent contradiction of using a stigmatic mark as a means of claiming a normative status? Our study suggests that one of self-injury’s intersubjective imperatives is the need to be listened to and taken seriously, to have one’s feelings and experiences confirmed by others as being legitimate and valid. As such, intersubjective recognition does appear to form a distinct part of the overdetermined complex of meanings and effects associated with self-injury and may be an important factor in a number of cases.
中文翻译:
非自杀性自残和主体间认知:“你不能与伤口争论”
本文探讨了主体间认知和“认知理论转向”与我们理解非自杀性自残的相关性。虽然之前的研究表明,自伤除了其内心特征外,还具有重要的社会维度,但任何处理自伤的社会方法面临的主要挑战是找到一种方法来描述和分析这个维度,而不是简单地暗示自伤是一种行为。一种“寻求关注”的形式,描述了对社会操纵的贬义指控。解决这一挑战的一个可能的解决方案在于主体间认可的概念,以及一些人所解释的“寻求关注”行为也许更好地理解为寻求认可的想法。因此,我们利用 2016-2017 年英国试点研究的数据来检验三个基本问题:(1)自伤是否至少在某些情况下以及在其许多其他观察到的内心和社会功能中构成一种认可形式-寻求?(2) 如果是这样,自残如何作为承认的主张?(3),我们如何解决使用污名标记作为声称规范地位的手段的明显矛盾?我们的研究表明,自残的主体间要求之一是需要被倾听和认真对待,需要别人确认自己的感受和经历是合法和有效的。因此,主体间认可似乎确实构成了与自残相关的意义和影响的多重决定复合体的一个独特部分,并且可能是许多案例中的一个重要因素。
更新日期:2024-02-02
中文翻译:
![](https://scdn.x-mol.com/jcss/images/paperTranslation.png)
非自杀性自残和主体间认知:“你不能与伤口争论”
本文探讨了主体间认知和“认知理论转向”与我们理解非自杀性自残的相关性。虽然之前的研究表明,自伤除了其内心特征外,还具有重要的社会维度,但任何处理自伤的社会方法面临的主要挑战是找到一种方法来描述和分析这个维度,而不是简单地暗示自伤是一种行为。一种“寻求关注”的形式,描述了对社会操纵的贬义指控。解决这一挑战的一个可能的解决方案在于主体间认可的概念,以及一些人所解释的“寻求关注”行为也许更好地理解为寻求认可的想法。因此,我们利用 2016-2017 年英国试点研究的数据来检验三个基本问题:(1)自伤是否至少在某些情况下以及在其许多其他观察到的内心和社会功能中构成一种认可形式-寻求?(2) 如果是这样,自残如何作为承认的主张?(3),我们如何解决使用污名标记作为声称规范地位的手段的明显矛盾?我们的研究表明,自残的主体间要求之一是需要被倾听和认真对待,需要别人确认自己的感受和经历是合法和有效的。因此,主体间认可似乎确实构成了与自残相关的意义和影响的多重决定复合体的一个独特部分,并且可能是许多案例中的一个重要因素。