Understanding Discursive Psychology, Attitudes and Attribution

Discursive Psychology Discursive psychology was initially developed by Potter and Wetherell in 1987. It emerged from the broader "turn to language" in the social sciences during the 1980s. This approach represents a significant shift in the study of psychological phenomena, both in past and present research. It recognizes the importance of focusing on the analysis of talk and text as valuable research subjects in their own right, rather than merely as tools for accessing underlying cognitive processes. Unlike traditional methods that treated language primarily as a means to access internal cognitive processes, discursive psychology emphasizes the importance of examining language as a form of social action (McMullen, 2021). In discursive psychology, discourse (text and speech) is not merely seen as a reflection of mental states but as an active component of social interaction. This perspective is grounded in the idea that language plays a crucial role in constructing reality, managing relationships, and performing various social actions (McHoul & Rapley, 2001). Discursive psychology’s emphasis on the social functions of language aligns closely with the principles of Critical Social Psychology. Both approaches critique traditional psychology's focus on internal mental states, such as attitudes and attributions, and instead emphasize how psychological phenomena are shaped by social, cultural, and political contexts. With time the approaches to discursive psychology have changed and evolved as it now has shifted from focusing on interviewing and interpretative repertoires to a more focused approach into sequential analysis informed by conversation analysis principles (Kent & Potter, 2014; Locke & Budds, 2020). Potter (2002) argues that interviews are designed to elicit specific interactions from participants, resulting in a co-constructed reality. While interviews are useful for collecting data, it is important to recognize their limitations, as the situation is intentionally set up for the interaction to occur. Consequently, naturally occurring everyday discourse is preferable for discursive psychology (O'Reilly & Kiyimba, 2015). This preference reflects discursive psychology’s alignment with Critical Social Psychology’s focus on understanding how psychological phenomena are situated within and influenced by broader socio-cultural and political contexts. Both approaches seek to reveal how psychological processes are not merely individual but deeply intertwined with social practices and structures.This shift reflects the field’s focus on understanding discourse within its natural context to better capture how language functions in real-life social interactions. Discursive psychology applies principles from discourse analysis to psychological topics, focusing on how people use language to negotiate meaning, establish social norms, and influence others. Language is viewed as a tool for performing a range of actions, such as making requests, giving orders, blaming, justifying, or constructing identities, rather than simply conveying thoughts or emotions (Potter, 2003). This approach highlights the role of language in organizing and managing social interactions, rather than seeing it solely as a reflection of internal mental states. To fully understand discourse, it is essential to analyze it within its actual context, considering the specific situational factors in which it occurs. Discourse must be examined as it unfolds in real-time, paying attention to how individuals use language to construct interpretations of the world and what happens around them (Edwards & Potter, 2018). These interpretations not only shape individuals' thoughts and beliefs but also influence their actions and the events around them. By analyzing how people talk about various topics, researchers can uncover how these linguistic practices shape perceptions and impact social practices and interactions (Potter & Wiggins, 2007; Wiggins, 2017).  Mainstream psychology often assumes that language is merely a way of conveying pre-existing thoughts and feelings. In contrast, discursive psychology demonstrates how language itself is a form of action that shapes and manages social realities. Potter (2012) argues that discursive psychology offers a significant opportunity for mainstream psychology to rethink traditional concepts. By incorporating discursive psychology, traditional psychology could benefit from a broader understanding of how language and expression are influenced by cultural and environmental factors. Discursive psychology views what people colloquially refer to as having an “attitude” not just as an internal psychological state but as different kinds of evaluations people make and the contexts in which these evaluations are used. This perspective reveals that discourse is organized and conditioned by sociohistorical, cultural, social, political, economic, and institutional contexts (Crawford & Valsiner, 1999). These social constructionist presuppositions make discourse analysis relevant and useful for exploring psychological processes and their dynamic interrelationships with culture. Integrating discursive psychology into mainstream approaches can thus offer valuable insights and enrich our understanding of psychological phenomena. Discursive psychology has several limitations, particularly regarding data collection and analysis. Analyzing discourse in everyday life scenarios requires extensive time to understand the context behind spoken words. Potter (2002) argues that achieving a complete understanding in practice is challenging and suggests that researchers should either be actively involved as co-participants in data creation or remain entirely detached from data generation (O'Reilly & Kiyimba, 2015). Potter's preference is based on the notion that talk should be analyzed within the specific context of its occurrence. However, he acknowledges that naturalistic material may not always be suitable, and interviews can be appropriate for some research issues. Another limitation of discursive psychology is the difficulty in generalizing findings from specific contexts to broader populations or different settings. The context-specific nature of discourse can lead to inconsistencies when applying insights across varied contexts. However, qualitative studies that use discursive data can still yield coherent and definitive sociological accounts (Wooffitt, 2005). Gilbert and Mulkay (1984) proposed a four-step procedure to address variability in qualitative research: This approach can help overcome some of the challenges associated with discursive psychology and enhance the reliability of its findings. Enhancing practices in discursive analysis could better align with the principles of critical social psychology, which emphasize the role of social contexts in understanding psychological processes. With these improvements, discursive psychology could become a valuable tool for refining our approach to other psychological practices aimed at better comprehending human behavior and social constructions of communication. In this context, it is crucial to examine how discursive psychology addresses attitudes and attributions, as it reveals that these constructs are not merely internal states but are actively shaped through social interactions and rhetorical practices. This perspective highlights the dynamic nature of attitudes and attributions, emphasizing that understanding them requires a focus on how they are managed and framed within conversations. Attitudes and Attributions References

Improving Obesity Treatment And Prevention Through The Lens Of Critical Health Psychology

The NHS website suggests that obesity treatments should focus primarily on diet, exercise, medication, or surgery, without considering psychological evaluation or therapy as part of the treatment plan (Obesity, 2017). This approach is somewhat outdated, as research has increasingly shown that many individuals with obesity also struggle with mental health conditions. This can be seen in studies showing  that individuals with obesity, particularly women and those with severe cases, are more likely to experience depression and anxiety (Lavallee et al., 2021). From this we can see that there is an existing need for holistic approaches that address both the physical and psychological dimensions of obesity. The relationship between obesity and mental health disorders is very complex and multidimensional. Research comparing psychiatric outpatients to the general population found higher obesity rates among those with mental health issues, although the link wasn’t directly caused by psychiatric illness itself but by overlapping demographic factors like age, gender, and chronic illnesses (de Las Cuevas et al., 2011; Lavallee et al., 2021). This indicates that treating obesity requires more than addressing physical symptoms; it also involves understanding the individual’s broader mental and social context. Critical Health Psychology challenges the traditional medical approach to obesity, which often views the condition alone and separate from broader social, cultural, and psychological factors. The critical approach rejects the idea that individuals are fixed “objects” to be treated with standardized interventions like diets or surgery. Instead, it recognizes that people’s experiences of health and illness are shaped by their environments, social relationships, and cultural backgrounds (Chamberlain and Murray, 2009). For example, someone may become obese due to a shift in their social conditions, such as increased stress from a job change, financial pressures, or cultural influences on their diet. This perspective emphasizes that obesity is not simply the result of poor lifestyle choices, but can be deeply intertwined with mental health and social circumstances. Addressing obesity requires more than just recommending diets and exercise or choosing to go instead for surgical intervention. Many individuals who undergo bariatric surgery regain the weight because their mental health struggles are never addressed. Studies show that suboptimal weight loss, defined as failing to achieve 40%-60% of baseline excess weight loss after surgery, occurs in 11%-22% of patients, and weight regain is even more common (Noria et al., 2023). This highlights the importance of integrating psychological therapy into obesity treatment, targeting emotional and mental health issues that contribute to overeating, be it from an addiction or to cope with life situations. In conclusion, the NHS should consider adopting a more comprehensive and Critical health psychology perspective when it comes to obesity treatment. By incorporating psychological evaluations and therapy alongside traditional medical interventions, health professionals can better address the underlying mental health issues often associated with obesity. This aligns with Critical Health Psychology's perspective, which advocates for treatments that acknowledge the complex, socially constructed, and multifaceted nature of health, ultimately leading to more effective and sustainable outcomes for patients. References

Social Class In Education

Langhout et al. (2009) findings, highlight the critical issue of classism and its negative consequences, particularly for students from poor and working-class backgrounds. These students face not only economic barriers but also social ones, with class-related inequalities manifesting as feelings of exclusion, decreased belonging, and poorer mental health outcomes. This sense of not fitting in can contribute to a desire to drop out, which is particularly troubling for educational institutions and governments aiming for success across socio-economic backgrounds. Critical Social Psychology emphasizes that social class is not just an individual issue but is deeply intertwined to broader systems of power and inequality. Classism reflects not only personal biases but also societal structures that maintain existing power imbalances. The experiences of students from lower socioeconomic backgrounds, such as decreased belonging and increased dropout rates, are the result of these structural inequalities. In this way, classism in higher education can be seen as a reflection of a larger societal problem where access to resources, representation, and opportunities is unequally distributed (Gough et al., 2013). Taking this into account, classism in higher education is not only about financial hardship but also about cultural and social wealth. Pierre Bourdieu's concept of "cultural capital" (Bourdieu, 1986) helps explain why students from working-class backgrounds may struggle more than their wealthier peers. Cultural capital includes the skills, manners, etiquette and knowledge passed down in higher socio-economic environments, which gives students from wealthier backgrounds advantage when it comes to navigating academic and social life in universities. This may suggest why students from lower socio-economic backgrounds may experience a diminished sense of belonging in these types of environments.  Nonetheless, students from working-class backgrounds who adopt the etiquette and behaviors of wealthier peers may have an easier time blending into academic and social spaces that can eventually lead to better opportunities and important connections. These connections will be useful in the future  leading to benefits and easier mobility. Social learning theory (Bandura, 1977) suggests that behaviors, including manners, are learned through observation, which hints to a way for students in lower socioeconomic status to improve these possibilities even if it's not by economic means.  Analyzing and changing classism in higher education requires more than just having individuals of lower economic status mimic the behaviors of wealthier peers or offering them scholarships and financial aid. It is important to look at making systematic changes. Critical Social Psychology suggests that institutions can adapt to an education system that is not only financially but also culturally and socially accessible to all students, regardless of socioeconomic status. While financial support can immensely help alleviate some barriers, it does not fully address the deeper social and cultural obstacles that working-class students have. Many individuals still  prefer to get a job instead of debt, which highlights the inequalities. For true equity, universities and the government should go beyond financial solutions and should also  actively work on promoting inclusive environments that value diverse backgrounds and forms of knowledge, ensuring that all students feel they belong.  References

Understanding "Old Racism" And "New Racism"

The concept of racism is as dynamic as the cultures in which it exists, evolving in response to social norms and cultural shifts. As a Colombian raised on the coast where the African influence is deeply rooted, I have observed that racism takes on a nuanced form. The distinction between "old racism" (overt) and "new racism" (subtle) as described by Salter and Haugen (2017) resonates with my experiences but manifests differently depending on the context. In Colombia, for example, racism is often intertwined with classism, where socio-economic status or family heritage alters how individuals experience racial discrimination. "Old racism," with its crude and openly discriminatory practices, has largely become socially unacceptable in many contexts, including in Colombia and other parts of the world. It is now associated with being uncultured or hateful, which leads to a decrease in overt racist behaviors among certain groups. However, Critical Social Psychology argues that the ideological foundations of racism have not disappeared but instead they have become more subtil. This shift aligns with what Dovidio and Gaertner (1986) described as “aversive racism,” where individuals maintain racist attitudes but avoid outwardly discriminatory behaviors to conform to modern social norms. "New racism" on the other hand, works under the appearance of cultural differences, socio-economic status, and national unity, making it harder to identify and address (Dunn et al., 2004). In Colombia, for example, a Black individual from a prestigious family might not experience overt racism, while someone from a lower socio-economic background may still face blatant discrimination. This reflects a form of racism that is both racial and class-based, which mirrors the broader concept of intersectionality, which is a key idea in Critical Social Psychology. Intersectionality, as Crenshaw (1989) points out, helps us understand how multiple social identities (race, class, gender) intersect to create unique experiences of oppression or privilege. From a Critical Social Psychology standpoint, distinguishing racism from "old" and "new" can be valuable because it highlights how racism adapts to maintain social inequalities under the pretense of progress. While it may appear that society has moved past overt racist practices, systemic and subtle forms of racism continue to impact marginalized communities in many different ways. This perspective pushes us to move past individual biases and focus on the bigger systems that keep these inequalities in place.  As Gergen (2015) suggests, social psychology must critically analyze the socio-historical contexts that give rise to these shifts in behavior and attitudes. In conclusion, while the distinction between "old" and "new" racism is helpful in understanding how racial prejudice has evolved, it is also crucial to recognize how deeply racism is interwoven with other forms of discrimination, such as classism. By examining these intersections, we can better address the root causes of inequality and move towards a more inclusive society. Reference

Cognitive Behavioral Therapy Through Critical Social Psychology

Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT) is a widely regarded therapeutic approach, praised for its evidence-based effectiveness in addressing various psychological disorders such as depression, anxiety, and substance use amongst many others (What Is Cognitive Behavioral Therapy?, 2017). However, when viewed through the lens of Critical Social Psychology, certain limitations emerge. These potential limitations may suggest that while CBT can be quite effective for many individuals, its practices could be enhanced by considering broader social, economic  and cultural contexts, which can be major factors that affect the individual and their mental state. One of the key critiques of Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT) from a Critical Social Psychology perspective is its individualistic focus. While CBT emphasizes changing an individual's thoughts and behaviors, it often does not fully account for the social and cultural influences that contribute to psychological distress (Fox et al., 2009). Social inequalities, discrimination, and power imbalances can have deep psychological effects. By focusing primarily on cognitive distortions and personal coping mechanisms, CBT can overlook how larger social and economic factors shape mental health outcomes. For example, someone experiencing anxiety or depression may be affected to not only distorted thinking but also by external societal pressures such as discrimination or economic hardship (Gough et al., 2013). In Addition, CBT's emphasis on personal responsibility, may limit its effectiveness for clients whose distress comes from systemic issues. While learning coping skills can be empowering, Critical Social Psychology highlights that the challenges people face are often deeply connected to external factors like poverty, racism, or sexism (Gough et al., 2013; Smail, 2005). By integrating a more socio-cultural analysis into CBT, clients could better contextualize their struggles within broader systems of power, ultimately leading to more holistic treatment outcomes. Another limitation of CBT, from a critical perspective, is its tendency to pathologize certain thoughts or behaviors without considering their adaptive functions within specific social contexts. For example, behaviors labeled as "maladaptive" in therapeutic settings may actually serve as a necessary survival mechanism in environments filled with stress, trauma, or systemic injustice. A Critical Social Psychology approach can provide a more nuanced understanding, acknowledging that behaviors that seem problematic may be rational responses to unjust conditions, such as socioeconomic disparities or societal discrimination (Smail, 2005; Fox et al., 2009). By looking at these behaviors as adaptive instead of looking at them as purely maladaptive, therapists can help clients recognize the contextual factors influencing their actions, promoting a more compassionate and holistic approach to mental health that respects the individual's lived experiences and the broader socio political landscape in which they exist (Spector, 2020). In conclusion, while I believe that CBT is an effective and valuable therapeutic tool, it could benefit from integrating insights from Critical Social Psychology. Expanding its framework to include an understanding of social, cultural, and political factors would help it address the full spectrum of issues clients face. This would not only make CBT more inclusive but also it would take into account the real-world contexts in which people live to make better assumptions for treatment. References Fox, D., Prilleltensky, I., & Austin, S. (2009). Critical psychology for social justice: Concerns and dilemmas. In D. Fox, I. Prilleltensky, & S. Austin (Eds.), Critical psychology: An introduction (2nd ed., pp. 3–19). Sage Publications Ltd. Gough, B., McFadden, M., & McDonald, M. (2013). Critical Social Psychology: An Introduction. Palgrave Macmillan. Smail, D. (2005). Power, Interest and Psychology: Elements of a Social Materialist Understanding of Distress. PCCS Books. Spector, T. (2020). The impact of social and cultural context on mental health and wellbeing: The need for a critical perspective. International Journal of Social Psychiatry, 66(3), 250-258. What is Cognitive Behavioral Therapy? (2017). Https://Www.Apa.Org. https://www.apa.org/ptsd-guideline/patients-and-families/cognitive-behavioral