Abstract
In mainstream psychology, rather specific (and therefore restrictive) research perspectives on coping with disaster dominate. Research uses quantitative methods to build knowledge about the mechanisms and conditions by which disasters affect mental health. The focus of analysis is on measures of individual differences with regard to experiences, coping strategies, and mental health outcomes. Developing generalizable and, potentially, universally applicable models is a major research interest. We argue that methodologies used in mainstream psychologies are not compatible with the purposes of our approach—that is, to describe sociocultural-specific personal and communal long-term coping dynamics after a disaster. We argue that a cultural-psychological approach implies specific propositions about human subjectivity, human agency, and research methods. Previously prominent, restrictive epistemological approaches to coping with disasters need to be broadened by rethinking research units, allowing for complex interrelations instead of assuming a linear causal process, being process-oriented, and including power-critical investigations. This chapter ends with a presentation of the methodological approach used in our case study, which we believe exemplifies alternatives to mainstream psychological research in disaster contexts.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Indigenous knowledge is often referred to in different ways, including local knowledge, traditional knowledge, indigenous technical knowledge, peasants’ knowledge, traditional environmental knowledge, and folk knowledge (Sillitoe 2010).
- 2.
- 3.
In Chap. 2, we have shown possible ethnocentric and androcentric fallacies that accompany such universalistic presumptions.
- 4.
All names of research participants and research sites used in this book have been changed to ensure anonymity.
- 5.
The data analyzed in Chap. 16 were collected by Silke Schwarz over the course of her dissertation research, for which she also conducted field stays.
- 6.
International examples were: 19th International Congress of the International Association for Cross-Cultural Psychology (IACCP), Bremen, Germany; 20th International Congress of the International Association for Cross-Cultural Psychology (IACCP), Melbourne, Australia; 1st International Conference of Indigenous and Cultural Psychology, Yogyakarta, Indonesia; 2nd International Conference of Indigenous and Cultural Psychology, Denpasar, Indonesia. Local forums included village celebrations or workshops and presentations at the Universitas Gadjah Mada, Yogyakarta.
- 7.
Data were mainly collected by Lucia P. Novianti, Nindyah Rengganis, Tiara R. Widiastuti, Yohanes K. Herdiyanto, and Silke Schwarz, with support from Ratri Atmoko Benedictus, Budi Rahmat Riadi, David Hizkia Tobing, Christoph Uhle, Jeane A. Indradjaja and Mechthild von Vacano.
- 8.
PKK stands for Program Kesejahteraan Keluarga, the Program for Family Welfare that is a government program to improve family welfare within hamlets. PKK groups are governed by the wife of the hamlet head, an arrangement that represents hierarchical structures in village life and reinforces a gender-separated distribution of tasks. All PKK participants are married women and their activities relate to increasing family income and improving health.
- 9.
In the context of another investigation on Java, Zaumseil (2006a) reported that it was useful to have eight narrating informants including the individual who was personally affected.
- 10.
For the implementation of practical research, Clarke (2005) developed a fruitful approach to the social scientific analysis of complex situations. Based on grounded theory and exceeding the boundaries of that framework, Clarke’s approach creates links among disciplines and various scientific viewpoints.
- 11.
The impersonal “we” used hereinafter mainly refers to the German research team as analysts, while the Indonesian researchers’ perspectives were included through discussion and feedback rounds.
- 12.
More detailed research questions can be found in the relevant empirical chapters.
References
Acker, J., Barry, K., & Essveld, J. (1991). Objectivity and truth. Problems in doing feminist research. In M. Fonow & J. Cook (Eds.), Beyond methodology. Feminist scholarship as lived research (pp. 133–153). Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
Antlöv, H. (2005). The social construction of power and authority in Java. In H. Antlöv & J. Hellman (Eds.), The Java that never was. Academic theories and political practices (pp. 43–66). Münster: LIT.
Beatty, A. (1999). Varieties of Javanese religion. An anthropological account. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Behnke, C., & Meuser, M. (1999). Geschlechterforschung und qualitative Methoden. Qualitative Sozialforschung 1. Opladen: Leske+Budrich.
Beittinger-Lee, V. (2009). (Un)civil society and political change in Indonesia. Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon; New York: Routledge.
Berg, E., & Fuchs, M. (1993). Kultur, soziale Praxis, Text. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.
Bergold, J., & Thomas, S. (2012). Participatory research methods: A methodological approach in motion [110 paragraphs]. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung/ Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 13(1), http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0114-fqs1201304. Accessed 12 Dec 2013.
Berry, J., Poortinga, Y., Breugelmans, S., Chasiotis, A., & Sam, D. (2011). Cross-cultural psychology. Research and applications (3rd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Birkmann, J., & Wisner, B. (2006). Measuring the un-measurable. The challenge of vulnerability. Bonn: Publication Series of UNU-EHS No. 5.
Blumer, H. (1969). Symbolic interactionism: Perspective and method. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.
Bonanno, G. A., Brewin, C. R., Kaniasty, K., & La Greca, A. M. (2010). Weighing the costs of disaster: consequences, risks, and resilience in individuals, families and communities. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 11(1), 1–49.
Bourdieu, P. (2005). Die männliche Herrschaft. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.
Bourdieu, P., & Wacquant, L. (1996). Reflexive Anthropologie. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.
Brokensha, D., Warren, D., & Werner, O. (Eds.). (1980). Indigenous knowledge systems and development. Lanham: University Press of America.
Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative analysis. London: Sage.
Chiwaka, E., & Yates, R. (n.d.). Participatory vulnerability analysis. A step–by–step guide for field staff. Actionaid International. http://www.actionaid.org.uk/sites/default/files/doc_lib/108_1_participatory_vulnerability_analysis_guide.pdf. Accessed 27 March 2013.
Cisneros-Puebla, C. A. (2007). The deconstructive and reconstructive faces of social construction. Kenneth Gergen in conversation with César A. Cisneros-Puebla. With an introduction by Robert B. Faux [83 paragraphs]. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung/ Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 9(1). http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0114-fqs0801204. Accessed 6 Jan 2013.
Clarke, A. (2005). Situational analysis. Grounded theory after the postmodern turn. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Clifford, J. (1988). The predicament of culture. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Crowe, M., & Sheppard, L. (2010). Qualitative and quantitative research designs are more similar than different. The Internet Journal of Allied Health Sciences and Practice, 8(4). http://ijahsp.nova.edu/articles/Vol8Num4/crowe_8_4_.htm. Accessed 26 Jan 2013.
Dekens, J. (2007). Local knowledge for disaster preparedness. Kathmandu: International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development (ICIMOD). Online: http://preventionweb.net/go/2693. Accessed 10 May 2013.
Engler, S. (2004). Constructionism versus what? Religion, 34(4), 291–313.
Farnell, B. (2000). Getting out of the habitus: An alternative model of dynamically embodied social action. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute, 6(3), 397–418.
Flick, U. (2009). An introduction to qualitative research. London: Sage.
Folkman, S. (1997). Positive psychological states and coping with severe stress. Social Science & Medicine, 45(8), 1207–1221.
Gergen, K. J. (1999). An invitation to social construction. London: Sage.
Gergen, K. J., & Gergen, M. M. (1997). Toward a cultural constructionist psychology. Theory & Psychology, 7, 31–36.
Glaser, B. G. (1978). Theoretical sensitivity. Mill Valley: Sociology Press.
Glaser, B. G. (1992). Basics of grounded theory analysis. Mill Valley: Sociology Press.
Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). Discovery of grounded theory. Mill Valley: Sociology Press.
Habermas, J. (1981). Theorie des kommunikativen Handelns. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.
Haseman, B. (2006). A manifesto for performative research. Media International Australia incorporating Culture and Policy, theme issue Practice-led Research (no. 118), pp. 98–106. http://eprints.qut.edu.au/3999/1/3999_1.pdf. Accessed 16 Feb 2013.
Hobfoll, S. E. (2001). The influence of culture, community, and the nested self in the stress process: Advancing conservation of resources theory. Applied Psychology, 50(3), 337–421.
Hobfoll, S. E. (2011). Conservation of resources theory: Its implication for stress, health and resilience. In S. Folkman & P. E. Nathan (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of stress, health, and coping (pp. 127–147). New York: Oxford University Press.
Holtzappel, C., & Ramstedt, M. (2009). Decentralization and regional autonomy in Indonesia. Singapore, Leiden, Netherlands: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies; International Institute for Asian Studies.
Jigyasu, R. (2002). Reducing disaster vulnerability through local knowledge and capacity. http://ntnu.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:123824/FULLTEXT01. Accessed 6 June 2013.
Kalayjian, A., Kanazi, R. L., Aberson, C. L., & Feygin, L. (2002). A cross-cultural study of the psychosocial and spiritual impact of natural disaster. International Journal of Group Tensions, 31(2), 175–186.
Kemmis, S., & McTaggart, R. (2005). Participatory action research: Communicative action and the public sphere. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 559–604) (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Kim, U. (2000). Indigenous, cultural, and cross-cultural psychology: A theoretical, conceptual, and epistemological analysis. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 3(3), 265–287.
Kleinman, A., & Erin, F.-H. (2007). The experiential basis of subjectivity: How individuals change in the context of societal transformation. In J. Biehl, B. Good, & A. Kleinman (Eds.), Subjectivity. Ethnographic investigations (pp. 52–65). Berkeley: University of California Press.
Lykes, M. (2001a). Activist participatory research and the arts with rural Maya women: Interculturality and situated meaning making. In D. L. Tolman, & M. Brydon-Miller (Eds.), From subjects to subjectivities: A handbook of interpretive and participatory methods (pp. 183–199). New York: New York University Press.
Lykes, M. (2001b). Creative arts and photography in participatory action research in Guatemala. In P. Reason, & H. Bradbury (Eds.), Handbook of action research. Participative inquiry and practice (pp. 363–371). Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Markard, M. (2010). Kritische Psychologie: Forschung vom Standpunkt des Subjekts. In G. Mey & K. Mruck (Eds.), Handbuch Qualitative Forschung in der Psychologie (pp. 166–181). Wiesbaden: Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.
Manning, C., & van Diermen, P. (Eds.). (2000). Indonesia in transition: Social Aspects of Reformasi and Crisis. Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies.
Mead, G. H. (1934). Mind, self, and society. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Mercer, J., Dominey-Howes, D., Kelman, I., & Lloyd, K. (2007). The potential for combining indigenous and western knowledge in reducing vulnerability of environmental hazards in small island developing states. Environmental Hazards, 7(4), 245–256.
Mercer, J. (2012). Knowledge and disaster risk reduction. In B. Wisner, J. C. Gaillard, & I. Kelman (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of hazards and disaster risk reduction (pp. 97–108). London: Routledge.
Morgan, D. L. (1997). Focus groups as qualitative research (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Norris, F. H. (2006). Disaster research methods. Journal of Traumatic Stress, 19(2), 173–184.
Norris, F. H., Tracy, M., & Galea, S. (2009). Looking for resilience: Understanding the longitudinal trajectories of responses to stress. Social Science & Medicine, 68(12), 2190–2198.
Oliver-Smith, A. (1998). Disasters, social change, and adaptive systems. In E. L. Quarantelli (Ed.), What is a disaster? (pp. 231–233). London: Routledge.
Pakenham, K. I. (2011). Benefit finding and sense making in chronic illness. In S. Folkman & P. E. Nathan, (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of stress, health, and coping (pp. 242–268). New York: Oxford University Press.
Pargament, K. I. (2011). Religion and coping: The current state of knowledge. In S. Folkman & P. E. Nathan (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of stress, health, and coping (pp. 269–288). New York: Oxford University Press.
Pargament, K. I., Koenig, H. G., & Perez, L. M. (2000). The many methods of religious coping: Development and initial validation of the RCOPE. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 56(4), 519–543.
Pemberton, J. (1994). On the subject of Java. New York: Cornell University Press.
Prawitasari-Hadiyono, J. E., Paramastri, I., Suhapti, R., Novianti, L. P., Widiastuti, T. R., & Rengganis, N. (2009). Social artistry, lokales Wissen und Konflikte nach einem Erdbeben. Zeitschrift für Psychodrama und Soziometrie, 8(2), 277–295.
Priya, K. R. (2004). Survivors’ suffering and healing amidst changing socioeconomic forces in two years of post-earthquake Kachchh. Psychology & Developing Societies, 16(1), 41–60.
Priya, K. R (2010). Research relationship as a facilitator of remoralization and self-growth: Post-earthquake suffering and healing. Qualitative Health Research, 20, 479–495.
Priya, K. R. (2012). Social constructionist approach to suffering and healing: Juxtaposing Cassell, Gergen and Kleinman. Psychological Studies, 57, 211–223.
Rabinow, P. (2007). Anthropological observation and self-formation. In J. G. Biehl, B. J. Good, & A. Kleinman (Eds.), Subjectivity. Ethnographic investigations (pp. 98–127). Berkeley: University of California Press.
Ratner, C. (2008). Cultural psychology, cross-cultural psychology, and indigenous psychology. New York: Nova Science Publishers.
Schlehe, J. (2006). Nach dem Erdbeben auf Java: Kulturelle Polarisierungen, soziale Solidarität und Abgrenzung. Internationales Asienforum, 37(3–4), 213–237.
Schwarz, S. (2012). Eine kritische und kultursensible Sicht auf das Mainstreaming von Gender in einem Katastrophenkontext: Umstrittene Gendergerechtigkeitsvorstellungen, ein heuristisches Modell sozialen Wandels und Strategieprozessvorstellungen. Betroffenen- und AktivistInnensichtweisen. Doctoral Dissertation, Fachbereich Erziehungswissenschaften und Psychologie, Freie Universität Berlin.
Sillitoe, P. (2010). Trust in development: Some implications of knowing in indigenous knowledge. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute, 16, 12–30.
Strauss, A. L. (1978). A social worlds perspective. Studies in Symbolic Interaction, 1, 119–128.
Strauss, A. L. (1987). Qualitative analysis for social scientists. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Strauss, A. L., & Corbin, J. (1990). Grounded Theory: Grundlagen Qualitativer Sozialforschung. Weinheim: Beltz Psychologie Verlags Union.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1985). Thought and language. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Wikgren, M. (2004). Critical realism as philosophy and social theory in information science. Journal of Documentation, 61(1), 11–22.
Winter, R. (2010). Sozialer Konstruktivismus. In G. Mey & K. Mruck (Eds.), Handbuch Qualitative Forschung in der Psychologie (pp. 123–135). Wiesbaden: Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.
Wisner, B., Blaikie, P., Cannon, T., & Davis, I. (2004). At risk: Natural hazards, people’s vulnerability and disasters (2nd ed.). London: Routledge.
Wohlrab-Sahr, M. (1993). Empathie als methodisches Prinzip? Entdifferenzierung und Reflexionsverlust als problematisches Erbe der „methodischen Postulate der Frauenforschung“. Feministische Studien, 11(2), 128–139.
Wulf, C., & Zirfas, J. (2001). Das Soziale als Ritual: Perspektiven des Performativen. In C. Wulf, B. Althans, K. Audehm, C. Bausch, M. Göhlich, S. Sting, A. Tervooren, M. Wagner-Willi, & J. Zirfas (Eds.), Das Soziale als Ritual (pp. 339–347). Opladen: Leske+Budrich.
Zaumseil, M. (2006a). Der alltägliche Umgang mit Schizophrenie in Zentral-Java. In E. Wohlfart & M. Zaumseil (Eds.), Transkulturelle Psychiatrie. Interkulturelle Psychotherapie – Interdisziplinäre Theorie und Praxis (pp. 332–360). Berlin: Springer.
Zaumseil, M. (2006b). Beiträge der Psychologie zum Verständnis des Zusammenhangs von Kultur und psychischer Gesundheit bzw. Krankheit. In E. Wohlfart & M. Zaumseil (Eds.), Transkulturelle Psychiatrie. Interkulturelle Psychotherapie – Interdisziplinäre Theorie und Praxis (pp. 3–50). Berlin: Springer.
Zaumseil, M. (2007). Qualitative Sozialforschung in Klinischer Kulturpsychologie. Psychotherapie und Sozialwissenschaft, 9(2), 99–116.
Acknowledgment
The editors would like to thank Sophie Perl for her assistance in editing this chapter.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2014 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Schwarz, S., Tyas, T., Prawitasari-Hadiyono, J. (2014). Methodological Basis of a Culture-Specific Coping Approach. In: Zaumseil, M., Schwarz, S., von Vacano, M., Sullivan, G., Prawitasari-Hadiyono, J. (eds) Cultural Psychology of Coping with Disasters. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-9354-9_5
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-9354-9_5
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY
Print ISBN: 978-1-4614-9353-2
Online ISBN: 978-1-4614-9354-9
eBook Packages: Behavioral ScienceBehavioral Science and Psychology (R0)