Encyclopedia of Couple and Family Therapy

2019 Edition
| Editors: Jay L. Lebow, Anthony L. Chambers, Douglas C. Breunlin

Social Constructionism in Couple and Family Therapy

  • Sheila McNameeEmail author
Reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-49425-8_820

Name of Concept

Social Constructionism in Couple and Family Therapy

Synonyms

Collaborative therapy; Dialogic approaches to therapy; Postmodern couple and family therapy

Introduction

Social constructionism is best described as a philosophical stance that, if adopted, orients us to the world in a relational – as opposed to individualist – manner. As a philosophical stance, social construction assumes that meaning emerges in what people do together. Social construction claims that, “what we take to be the truth about the world importantly depends on the social relationships of which we are a part” (Gergen 2015, p. 3). Thus, unlike our individualist tradition where meaning, rationality, motivation, and all that we take to be qualities of persons are assumed to be located within the person, social construction views these qualities as emergent byproducts of human interaction. The focus for the constructionist, therefore, is on interaction (i.e., what people do together) and on what their...

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Andersen, T. (Ed.). (1990). The reflecting team: Dialogues and dialogues about the dialogues. Kent: Borgmann.Google Scholar
  2. Anderson, H. (2016). Postmodern/poststructural/social construction therapies. In T. L. Sexton & J. Lebow (Eds.), Handbook of family therapy (pp. 182–204). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  3. Bateson, G. (1972). Steps to an ecology of mind. New York: Ballantine Books.Google Scholar
  4. Gergen, K. J. (2015). An invitation to social construction. London: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Haley, J. (1976). Problem-solving therapy. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  6. McNamee, S., & Gergen, K. J. (Eds.). (1992). Therapy as social construction. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  7. Minuchin, S. (1974). Families and family therapy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Palazzoli, M., Cecchin, G., Boscolo, L., & Prata, G. (1978). Paradox and counterparadox. New York: Jason Aronson.Google Scholar
  9. Seikkula, J. (1993). The aim of the work is to generate dialogue: Bakhtin and Vygotsky in family session. Human Systems, 4, 33–48.Google Scholar
  10. St. George, S., & Wulff, D. (2016). Personal communication.Google Scholar
  11. Wittgenstein, L. (1953). Philosophical Investigations (trans: Anscombe, G.E.M.). New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of New HampshireDurhamUSA

Section editors and affiliations

  • Margarita Tarragona
    • 1
  1. 1.PositivaMente & Grupo Campos ElíseosMexico CityMexico