home

Features of psychological conversation. Conversation as a method of psychology: concept, types, features of organization and conduct, advantages and disadvantages

As a result of studying this chapter, students will:

know

the essence and types of conversation as a method of scientific psychological research, its possibilities and limitations;
correlation of methods of observation and conversation, advantages of conversation as a scientific method;
the main stages and principles of organizing a conversation as a scientific method in psychology;

be able to

develop a conversation program;
determine the general strategy and tactics of conducting a conversation in order to collect new scientific data in psychology;

own

Skills of conducting and analyzing the minutes of the conversation.

General characteristics and types of conversation (interview) in psychological research

Conversation is one of the main scientific methods in social spiders in general and psychology in particular. IN general view conversation can be defined as a method of collecting data, as well as a method of influence based on the use of verbal communication. The conversation is used in all spheres of activity of a psychologist without exception: in psychotherapy and psychocorrection, in psychodiagnostics, in research activities etc.

In this chapter, we will consider the conversation only as a tool for conducting psychological research, leaving out of the discussion the features of its use in psychotherapeutic and psycho-corrective work. An important difference here is that in psychotherapeutic work, one of the main goals of using conversation is to influence the interlocutor, resulting in a change in the latter. In research activities, the conversation is considered solely as a way of obtaining data that does not imply the implementation of the impact.

The method of conversation is very multifaceted and is implemented using a large number of different ways. This method is used to obtain both qualitative and quantitative data, depending on which it is used both in the study of single cases or small samples, and in the study of a large number of subjects. In addition, the conversation takes different forms depending on how, who and when asks questions, how they get answers and what kind of questions are asked.

In general, research methods, which can be considered as modifications of the conversation method, can be divided into two main types - interviews (from English, interview) and surveys (in the English literature, the term is used survey). This division is due to the type of data that are obtained as a result of their application, and the features of the design of the study.

Polls are usually used to conduct research on large samples of subjects and are aimed at collecting predominantly quantitative information. Surveys can be conducted using personal or telephone interviews, as well as in writing in the form of correspondence surveys or questionnaires (when the respondent needs to answer questions formulated in advance in writing, and direct interaction between the researcher and the respondent is not implied). When conducting surveys on large samples, interpersonal interaction between the researcher and the respondent plays a less significant role, while much attention is paid to the unification of the survey procedure for all respondents.

In psychology, preference is given rather to qualitative interview methods, while surveys are the main tools of others. social sciences(sociology, political science, etc.), although they are also used in socio-psychological research. Depending on the specifics of the problem under study, as well as the goals and objectives of the study, preference may be given to various types of conversation.

The focus of this chapter is on a qualitative personal interview, and in what follows we will use the terms "conversation" and "interview" as synonyms. While the general ideas about interview design outlined here generally apply to conducting surveys, there are also some specifics that will not be discussed in this tutorial. For their

study, we refer you to the relevant literature, for example, to the works of M. V. Melnikova, G. M. Breslav, V. A. Yadov and others.

So, we will consider a conversation as a dialogue between people, allowing one person to find out psychological features, opinions, autobiographical information, etc. another person based on the exchange of verbal messages.

Using the conversation method allows you to get a huge amount of diverse information, which often cannot be obtained through the use of other methods. Where observation and experiment can provide only indirect information about the problem of interest to the researcher, conversation can be the most direct way to obtain data: you simply ask the person about everything that interests you. The conversation is especially indispensable in cases where other methods cannot be applied in principle. For example, if you are interested in the content of dreams or subjective states of a person that are not reflected in his behavior, you cannot use any other research approach for this.

Conversation is the only method that allows you to directly obtain information about the thoughts, opinions, preferences and point of view of the respondent, as well as such phenomenological information as his idea of himself and the reality he perceives. Conversation is convenient for conducting thought experiments when you invite the subject to simulate some situation and find out how he would act and feel in this case. Thus, the conversation is a universal research method with a very wide range of applications.

Given all the advantages and disadvantages of this method, it is necessary to clearly understand in which situations it should and should not be used, as well as in which cases the data obtained using it can be trusted and in which it cannot.

Due to its high non-specificity, the conversation method, like the observation method, can be used at different stages of the research process and in different qualities:

can be used to conduct a primary study of any issue, which will help in general to understand how to approach its further study (introductory interviews);
may be the main and only research method (when all the information collected in the study is based only on interviews);
usually, along with observation, it is used as component for field research (when, for example, the characteristics of any social groups are studied);
can also be used as a way to measure the dependent variable in experiments.

In addition, conversations are held at the first stage of constructing psychodiagnostic questionnaires. They are also used in post-experimental surveys to clarify the thoughts and feelings that arose in the subjects during the experiment, and to clarify possible guesses about the hypotheses being tested in the experiment.

The use of the conversation method, despite its universality, in some cases may be unjustified. For example, when it is supposed to study a large number of subjects in a short time, or if more reliable data can be obtained using other methods (for example, observation). It is also not recommended to conduct an interview when there are suspicions that the information received from respondents may be intentionally or unintentionally distorted by them, and also if the subjects, by definition, cannot give a self-report on the questions of interest to the researcher (for example, when studying children, people with psychopathology or etc.).

Conducting an interview may at first glance seem very similar to a normal conversation, but in reality, an interview differs from a conversation in a number of important ways.

First of all, in terms of having a goal. In a normal conversation, the goal, as a rule, is not explicitly explicated, you can guess about it in the course of communication, sometimes conversations may not have a goal more specific than "communication." In the course of a conversation, a wide range of topics can be touched upon, while topics can be born and appear in the course of a conversation. Topics for conversation are usually not planned in advance and are not moderated in the course of communication. When conducting an interview, the goal is thought out and formulated in advance and explicitly announced to the respondent. In general, the purpose of the interview is to obtain information from the respondent. Topics on which information is of interest to the interviewer are also formulated in advance.

In an interview, unlike a conversation, roles are more clearly distributed between the participants. In a research interview, the interviewer takes a more active position, it is he who asks questions and manages the conversation. The interviewee must answer questions, and can only ask them at the special invitation of the interviewer (for example, it is often suggested to do this at the end of the interview). In a normal conversation, both participants can ask questions, answer them, change topics of communication. When conducting a conversation, the respondent says much more than the interviewer, while in a normal conversation this is not clearly regulated.

In terms of how communication itself is built, a conversation is also very different from a simple conversation. So, usually in a simple conversation, very short answers are used, and the whole conversation is built on the basis of implicit knowledge known to all its participants, which are not pronounced explicitly. At the same time, in an interview, on the contrary, the answers should be as detailed as possible, and all implied information should be expressed explicitly so that it can really be understood and analyzed by other people.

In addition, there are usually no repetitions in the conversation: the topic discussed at some point is no longer mentioned further. In interviews, repetitions are used as special techniques for checking the reliability of answers, the sincerity of the respondent, as well as finding out additional information. Often the same content question can be formulated different ways and be asked in different parts of the interview, and this may lead to the discovery of illogicality in the answers of the respondent or to the clarification of new information not previously expressed.

Melnikova M.V. Interrogation method // Experimental psychology: practical work / ed. V. S. Smirnova, T. V. Kornilova. Moscow: Aspect Press. 2002, pp. 331-343.
Cm.: Breslav G. M. Fundamentals of psychological research.
Cm.: Yadov V. L. Strategy of sociological research. Description, explanation, understanding of social reality.

The method of conversation is a psychological verbal-communicative method, which consists in conducting a thematically oriented dialogue between a psychologist and a respondent in order to obtain information from the latter.

In a psychological conversation, there is direct interaction between the psychologist and the respondent in the form of an oral exchange of information. The method of conversation is widely used in psychotherapy. It is also used as independent method in consultative, political, legal psychology.

In the process of conversation, the psychologist, being a researcher, directs, covertly or explicitly, the conversation, during which he asks the person being interviewed questions.

There are two types of conversation:

· Managed

· Unmanaged

In the course of a guided conversation, the psychologist actively controls the course of the conversation, maintains the course of the conversation, and establishes emotional contact. An uncontrolled conversation occurs with a greater return of initiative from the psychologist to the respondent in comparison with the controlled one. In an unmanaged conversation, the focus is on giving the respondent the opportunity to speak out, while the psychologist does not interfere or almost does not interfere with the course of the respondent's self-expression.

In the case of both managed and unmanaged conversation, the psychologist is required to have the skill of verbal and non-verbal communication. Any conversation begins with the establishment of contact between the researcher and the respondent, while the researcher acts as an observer, analyzing the external manifestations of the respondent's mental activity. Based on the observation, the psychologist carries out express diagnostics and corrects the chosen strategy for conducting a conversation. At the initial stages of the conversation, the main task is to encourage the subject under study to actively participate in the dialogue.

The most important skill of a psychologist in a conversation situation is the ability to establish and maintain rapport, while maintaining the purity of the study, avoiding irrelevant (interfering with obtaining a reliable result) verbal and non-verbal influences on the subject, which can contribute to an active change in his reactions. Careless statements on the part of the psychologist, made, for example, in the form of orders, threats, moralizing, advice, accusations, value judgments regarding what the respondent said, reassurance and inappropriate jokes, can lead to the destruction of rapport with the respondent or to the provision of side suggestions to the respondent.

Conversations differ depending on the psychological task pursued. There are the following types:

Therapeutic conversation

Experimental conversation (in order to test experimental hypotheses)

Autobiographical conversation

Collection of subjective anamnesis (collection of information about the personality of the subject)

Collecting an objective anamnesis (gathering information about acquaintances of the subject)

・Telephone conversation

The interview is referred to both as a conversation method and a survey method.

There are two styles of conversation, and in its course one can replace the other depending on the context.

Reflective listening is a style of conversation that involves active verbal interaction between the psychologist and the respondent.

Reflective listening is used to accurately control the correctness of the perception of the information received. The use of this style of conversation may be associated with the personal characteristics of the respondent (for example, low level development of communication skills), the need to establish the meaning of the word that the speaker had in mind, cultural traditions (communication etiquette in the cultural environment to which the respondent and the psychologist belong).

Three main techniques for maintaining a conversation and controlling the information received:

1. Clarification (using clarifying questions)

2. Paraphrasing (formulation of what the respondent said in his own words)

3. Verbal reflection by the psychologist of the respondent's feelings

Non-reflexive listening is a style of conversation that uses only the minimum necessary, from the point of view of expediency, the minimum of words and non-verbal communication techniques on the part of the psychologist.

Non-reflexive listening is used in cases where there is a need to let the subject speak out. It is especially useful in situations where the interlocutor shows a desire to express his point of view, discuss topics of concern to him and where he has difficulty expressing problems, is easily confused by the intervention of a psychologist and behaves enslaved due to the difference in social status between psychologist and respondent.

Very often, when in a professional circle of psychologists they talk about the method of conversation, one has to meet with bewilderment or condescending looks, irony or complete indifference to the topic: conversation is something old, unscientific, it is the dawn of psychology, psychotherapy; what does this have to do with modern science with its ideals of precision and objectivity? Indeed, at first glance it seems that the method of conversation (so vague, so informal, so subjective) does not compare with precise experimental procedures, with tightly controlled experimental conditions and "objective" ways of evaluating data. So, on the one hand - computers, mathematical processing of results, special apparatus and equipment, and on the other - a conversation, just a conversation, with the complete absence of a visible, material "weapon" of the researcher. How can one investigate if one cannot press the magic button, if there is no saving technique, if nothing is presented on the screen? Instead - face to face with Him, with that other, but the same person as me - a step into the unknown, full of risk, danger and temptation. So, a conversation is a meeting of two people, but an experiment is also a dialogue of two consciousnesses, two personalities, the same meeting, often not direct, mediated by a wide variety of “tools” and “objects” (equipment, methodology, a sign on the door, a white coat , instruction, silence.). After all, the very situation of the experiment and everything that makes it up - from the experimental task to appearance the rooms, from the prestige of the institution to the behavior of the watchman, are full of meaning and meaning, they “speak” and send messages about who is behind the experiment, about its creator and organizer. What is the position of the so-called test subject? He "reads" or, in other words, "deobjectifies" these messages and, if they resonate in his personality, if they interest him, he tries to answer by entering into a dialogue, maybe in an argument, maybe in a fight, maybe going on a fascinating journey into the world offered to him - the world of another person, joining this world and life. Thus, behind the experiment, we see the relationship of two people, the dialogue of two consciousnesses, two positions, two worlds, and maybe not two. If we continue the digression into the methods of empirical psychological research, it turns out that none of them exist without this dialogue, without an interested meeting of two people, which is their indispensable condition. Otherwise, the subjects would refuse to overcome the slightest difficulties and simply would not “work” on tasks that sometimes require a lot of effort and dedication from a person. Thus, the traditionally opposed methods - experiment and conversation - coincide in their most essential conditions (establishing relationships and communication between two people), reflecting the specifics of psychological research (however, not only psychological, but also any humanitarian, directly involved in the study of human behavior and consciousness). ).

The conversation program is quite constant for each scale and is built approximately in next sequence:

1) clarification of the content of the current assessment;

2) clarification of the content of the poles of the scale;

3) clarification of the content and reasons for the desired assessment.

The tactics of the experimenter in this case is relatively free. They may be asked different questions depending on the characteristics of the subject, the course of the conversation, etc. Be sure to ask the subject to give explanatory examples for each of the items, illustrating his judgments about himself or other people.

For example, possible questions on the mind scale:

In what sense do you understand the word "mind" when you evaluate yourself?

How do you evaluate yourself in terms of your mind?

Whom could you put on the scale on the mind a little higher than yourself? Give, if possible, a description of such a person;

Who is the most stupid in your opinion?

Whom could you put on the scale on the mind a little lower than yourself? Describe in more detail what kind of person this is?

What mind would you like to have?

What do you lack to get closer to the ideal?

An approximate sequence of questions on the “happiness” scale:

How do you rate yourself in terms of “happiness”? (It is desirable to achieve a clear verbal assessment. This is important from two points of view: firstly, how this assessment correlates with the point indicated on the scale; for example, the middle is indicated on the scale, and the subject says that he is very “happy”; secondly, verbal assessment allows you to proceed to clarify its content).

How would you describe your state of happiness?

Who do you think is the happiest and why?

Who do you think is the most miserable and why?

What do you need to be completely happy?

What needs to be changed to reach this state?

If the subject gives a low score on this or any other scale, it is necessary to clarify: “Who is to blame for this situation?”. It is important to understand who the subject blames for the cause of the misfortune: himself or the world, it is necessary to determine with a greater or lesser degree of accuracy what properties of oneself or what properties of the world the subject has in mind.

A similar conversation procedure is carried out in the presence of a very high mark on the scale. At the same time, the subject is asked: “What is the reason for such a high rating? Are you the cause of it, or other people, the circumstances of life?.. Similar questions can be asked to the subject in the presence of a very low or very high score on any of the scales presented to him.

After the end of the conversation on the four main scales - "health", "character", "mind", "happiness" (it is necessary to maintain just such a sequence in the conversation) - the experimenter turns to the additional scale "knowledge of oneself". Here the range of questions is somewhat different: in the conversation needs to find out what determines the assessment of knowledge of oneself; what are the reasons for its height on the scale; what is self-knowledge, according to the subject; what kind of people know themselves, how it manifests itself; is it difficult to know oneself, is it possible to learn it; if possible, then how, if not, then why, etc.

A few words about the behavior of the experimenter during the experiment. We have already said that conducting a conversation requires great skill from a psychologist. Any negligence, inattention to the personality of the subject, an attempt to directly dictate to him the requirements and instructions will inevitably lead to the failure of the experiment, to the transformation of the conversation - at best - into a formal questioning.

The situation of this task - the presentation of self-esteem scales - facilitates the experimenter's task, since the subject is given some specific material, which is a good pretext, a "hook" for further conversation, deployment of her program. However, under these conditions, the requirements for the experimenter remain high. It is necessary from the very beginning to strive to show the interest of the experimenter in the answers of the subject. At the same time, the experimenter should not be verbose, and any value judgments should be avoided as far as possible. It is verbosity, the desire to constantly intervene in the conversation, comment, evaluate, guide the subject, suggest to him the desired answer, as a rule, characterizes an inexperienced psychologist. It should also be understood and remembered from the outset that a conversation, even a standardized one, is not limited by the requirement to be as impeccably rigorous as an experiment in, say, the study of eye movement or short term memory. The subjects, for one reason or another, may violate the conversation plan that was thought out in advance, go aside, linger on seemingly insignificant, at first glance, questions. Such actions are not, however, a "disruption" of the experiment, but, on the contrary, make the situation of the conversation more interesting, so they must be recorded as carefully as the material of the "planned" conversation.

During the entire time of the study, the behavior of the experimenter should be very tactful and restrained.

An axiom for a psychologist is also the observance of the principle of anonymity of the data obtained about the sides of the personality of the subject, the right to use these data only within the framework of purely scientific and professional purposes.

Having finished clarifying the content of the subject's marks on all five scales, the experimenter proceeds to the final part of the conversation. For this, statements of this type are used: “Here we have reached the end of our work. We discussed your scores on the scales. It was very interesting to talk with you, I am very grateful to you for your work. But maybe you have questions for me? Would you like to ask them now? .. It is very important what the subject asks, how much it will intersect with the content of the conversation. Finally completing the conversation, it is necessary to once again express gratitude to the subject.

Recording of the conversation and its protocol. Recording a conversation should not interfere with communication between the subject and the researcher. The most convenient form of registration is a hidden or open recording of a conversation on a tape. Indeed, in addition to the content of the conversation, the intonational features of the subject's speech, its emotional coloring, pauses, reservations, etc. are recorded on the tape.

In order to relieve the stress of the subject during an open recording of a conversation on a tape recorder, it is necessary to explain to him for what purpose the recording is being made - so that during the conversation the experimenter is not distracted by keeping a record. It is necessary to immediately turn on the tape recorder and let the subject listen to the recording of the voices of both participants in the conversation. Thanks to this simple technique, the tape recorder becomes the same part of the "psychological field" as, for example, the table at which the interlocutors sit. The microphone and tape recorder are located to the side of the interlocutors, so that with good recording quality, this equipment is not yet in the center of the subject's field of view, but is located closer to the periphery.

However, even in the presence of a tape recording, and especially in its absence, the experimenter is obliged to keep a record and record in it the behavior of the subject during the conversation, his gestures, facial expressions, pantomime, emotional reactions. In its most general form, the protocol is as follows:

At the top of each page of the protocol, the initials of the subject, the date and time of the experiment (beginning and end) are recorded. in the middle column - the behavior of the subject, his gestures, facial expressions, emotional reactions; in the right column - statements, answers and explanations of the subject.

Entries in the protocol "performed both during the conversation and after it (when rewritten from a tape for further processing) should be verbatim, not abbreviated.

It is the detailed protocol executed according to the indicated form that is the material that becomes the subject of subsequent analysis.

Description and analysis of the content of the conversation. First of all, it is necessary to describe the general behavior of the subject during the entire experience, his dynamics from the beginning to the end of the conversation, the change in gestures and facial expressions of the subject, how constrained he is, etc.

Then one should dwell in detail on how communication was built during the conversation, what were the reactions of the subject to the questions of the experimenter, the nature of the answers, their development and content, what position the subject took during the communication (active, passive, formal, etc.) and What exactly did she show up in?

It is necessary to characterize the speech of the subject: features of the stylization of his phrases; rich vocabulary; the presence of emotionally expressive expressions in speech, the nature of intonational dynamics in speech; use of speech stamps, etc.

You should further list the main topics that arose in the course of the conversation during the implementation of her program, try to establish their semantic connections and make an assumption about the reason for the emergence of these connections, based, of course, on the statements of the subject and on their content.

Then it is necessary, using the marks on the scales set by the subject, and the protocol of the conversation with him, to analyze the results of self-assessment on each of the four main scales (“health”, “mind”, “character”, “happiness”). In this case, it is necessary:

Indicate the height of self-esteem on this scale (actual and desired);

Analyze received content information

current self-assessment;

Analyze the information received about the content of the poles of the scale (i.e. extreme points the entire subjective "field of evaluations" within which the subject defines himself);

Analyze the information received about the content of the desired self-assessment;

Make a conclusion based on the results of the study of this scale.

Following the analysis of the four main scales, one should proceed to the analysis of the results obtained on the additional scale (“knowledge of oneself”). Particular attention should be paid here to the idea of the subject about his possibilities of self-knowledge, to the nature of the criticality of this subject.

In conclusion, it is necessary to analyze the general nature of the self-assessment of the subject.

1. Nikandrov VV Verbal-communicative methods in psychology. St. Petersburg: Speech, 2002.

2. Abramova TjC, Psychological Counseling Workshop. Yekaterinburg: Business book, 1995.

3. Annushkin VM. The first Russian "rhetoric" (From the history of rhetorical thought). Moscow: Knowledge, 1989.

4. Andreeva GM, Social psychology: A textbook for higher educational institutions. M: Nauka, 1994.

5. Atvater I, I'm listening to you: Tips for the leader> how to listen to the interlocutor. M.: Economics, 1984.

6. Bakhtin MM. Aesthetics of verbal creativity. M.: Art, 1979.

7. Dotsenko E.A. Do not be a parrot, or how to protect yourself from a psychological attack, Tyumen: IPK PK, 1994.

8. Zhukov Yu.M. The effectiveness of business communication. ML: Knowledge, 1988.

9. Signs V. The main directions of the study of understanding in foreign psychology // Questions of psychology. 1986, no. 3.

10. Kazanskaya AV. What is it talking about? // Moscow psychotherapeutic journal. 1996, no. 2.

11. Kopiev A.F. Individual psychological counseling in the context of family psychotherapy // Questions of Psychology, 1986. No. 4.

12. Kopiev A.F. Psychological counseling: the experience of dialogic interpretation // Questions of Psychology, 1990, N° 3.

13. Lectures on the methodology of specific social research / Ed. G.M. Andreeva. M.: Publishing House of Moscow. un-ta, 1972.

14. Leontiev A.N. Activity, Consciousness. Personality. M: Politizdat, 1975,

15. Lisina M.I. Problems of the ontogeny of communication. Moscow: Pedagogy, 1986.

16. Lusher M. Personality signals: role-playing games and their motives. Voronezh: NPO MODEK, 1995.

- 24.97 Kb

ESSAY

in psychology

On the topic "Conversation as a research method"

1 The essence of the conversation method…………………………………………………………….3

2 The main types of conversations in the study………………………………………..5

3 The structure of the conversation………………………………………………………...………..7

List of sources used………………………………………..….. .9

1 ESSENCE OF THE CONVERSATION METHOD

Conversation is a method of studying human behavior that is specific to psychology, since in other natural sciences communication between the subject and the object of research is impossible. A dialogue between two people, during which one person reveals the psychological characteristics of the other, is called the method of conversation. Psychologists of various schools and trends widely use it in their research. Suffice it to name Piaget and the representatives of his school, humanistic psychologists, founders and followers of "depth" psychology, and so on.

A conversation is a method of obtaining information based on the interlocutor's answers to questions posed by a psychologist in direct contact. During the conversation, the researcher reveals the characteristics of the behavior and mental state of the interlocutor. The condition for the success of the conversation is the subject's trust in the researcher, the creation of a favorable psychological atmosphere. Useful information during the conversation is given by the external behavior of the subjects, their facial expressions, gestures, intonation of speech.

The purpose of the conversation method is usually to check and clarify in direct communication with the interlocutor a number of questions incomprehensible to the psychologist that arose in the course of studying the socio-psychological and individual psychological qualities of his personality. In addition, the purpose of the conversation is to clarify the structure of the motivational sphere, since behavior and activity are usually determined not by one, but by several motives, which can most likely be identified in communication with the interlocutor.

The conversation allows you to mentally simulate any situation that the psychologist needs. It goes without saying that intentions are best judged by actions, not words. However, the interlocutor's subjective states may not find expression in his behavior in given circumstances, but they manifest themselves in other conditions and situations.

Successful use of conversation as a research method is possible with the appropriate qualifications of a psychologist, which implies the ability to establish contact with the subject, to give him the opportunity to express his opinion as freely as possible. The art of using the conversation method is to know what to ask and how to ask. Subject to the requirements and proper precautions, the conversation allows you to get no less reliable than in observation or in the psychological analysis of documents, information about the events of the past, present or planned future. However, during the conversation, it is necessary to separate personal relationships from the content of the conversation.

The advantage of the interview method is that it is based on personal communication, which eliminates some of the negative aspects that arise when using the questionnaire. The conversation also gives greater confidence in the correct understanding of the issues, since the researcher has the opportunity to explain the issue in detail. The reliability of the answers is also expected, since oral form a conversation conducted by only two people creates the prerequisites that the answers to questions will not be announced.

The disadvantage of the conversation method in comparison with the questionnaire is the lengthiness, rather slow accumulation of data in surveys of a mass nature. That is why, in practice, they are more willing to resort to a questionnaire, since it saves time.

MAIN TYPES OF CONVERSATIONS IN THE RESEARCH

As you know, conversation is one of the most productive methods of research in personality psychology, which makes it possible to peer into the inner world of a person, in many respects to understand its complex, often contradictory content.

The special place of conversation in the arsenal of research methods is also due to the fact that although this method does not require the involvement of complex additional equipment and equipment, at the same time, like no other, it places high demands on the experimental psychologist, his skill, and professional maturity.

The possibilities of conversation as a dialogue - a tool for meeting a person with a person - are associated, in particular, with the breadth of the choice of the type of conversation in the spectrum from "completely controlled" to "practically free". The main criteria for classifying a conversation as a certain type are the features of a pre-prepared plan (program and strategy) and the nature of the standardization of the conversation, i.e. its tactics. Under the program and strategy, as a rule, they mean a set of semantic topics compiled by a psychologist in accordance with the goals and objectives of the conversation and the sequence of movement between them. The higher the degree of standardization of the conversation, the more strict, defined and invariable the set and form of the psychologist's questions in it, i.e., the more rigid and limited is his tactics. The standardization of the conversation also means that the initiative in it moves to the side of the psychologist who asks questions.

Thus, a fully controlled conversation involves a rigid program, strategy and tactics, and the opposite pole is an almost free conversation - the absence of a pre-formulated program and the presence of an initiative position in the conversation with the one with whom it is conducted. Between them are the following main types of conversations:

Standardized conversation - persistent program, strategy and tactics;

Partially standardized - persistent program and strategy, tactics are much more free;

Free - the program and strategy are not predetermined, or only in general terms, the tactics are completely free.

Fully and partly standardized conversation allows comparison of different people; conversations of this type are more capacious in terms of time, may rely on less clinical experience of the psychologist and limit unintended impact on the subject.

However, their great disadvantage is that they do not seem to be a completely natural procedure, having a more or less pronounced connotation of an examination survey, and therefore fettering immediacy and triggering defense mechanisms.

As a rule, this type of conversation is resorted to if the psychologist has already established cooperation with the interlocutor, the problem under study is simple and is rather partial.

A conversation of a free type is always focused on a particular given interlocutor. It allows you to receive a lot of data not only directly, but also indirectly, maintain contact with the interlocutor, has a strong psychotherapeutic content, and ensures high spontaneity in the manifestation of significant signs. This type of conversation is characterized by particularly high demands on the professional maturity and level of the psychologist, his experience and ability to creatively use the conversation.

In general, the procedure for conducting a conversation suggests the possibility of including various modifications in it - tactics that make it possible to especially enrich its content. So, in conversations with children, dolls, various toys, paper and pencil, and dramatic scenes justify themselves well. Similar techniques are also possible in conversations with adults; it is only necessary that they organically enter the conversation system. The presentation of specific material (for example, a scale) or a discussion of the content of the drawing just made by the subject becomes not only a “hook” for the further course of the conversation, deploying its programs, but also allows you to obtain additional indirect data about the subject.

STRUCTURE OF THE CONVERSATION

Despite the obvious variety of types of conversation, they all have a number of permanent structural blocks, the consistent movement along which ensures the complete integrity of the conversation.

The introductory part of the conversation plays a very important role in the composition. It is here that it is necessary to interest the interlocutor, to involve him in cooperation, that is, “to set him up for joint work.

What matters is who initiated the conversation. If it takes place on the initiative of a psychologist, then its introductory part should interest the interlocutor in the topic of the upcoming conversation, arouse the desire to participate in it, and make clear the significance of his personal participation in the conversation. Most often this is achieved by appealing to the interlocutor's past experience, by showing a benevolent interest in his views, assessments, and opinions.

The subject is also informed about the approximate duration of the conversation, its anonymity, and, if possible, about its goals and further use of the results.

If the initiator of the upcoming conversation is not the psychologist himself, but his interlocutor, who turns to him about his problems, then the introductory part of the conversation should clearly demonstrate mainly the following: that the psychologist is tactful and careful about the positions of the interlocutor, he does not condemn anything, but also does not justifies, accepting him as he is.

In the introductory part of the conversation, the first test of its stylization takes place. After all, the set of expressions and turns used by the psychologist, the appeal to the interlocutor depend on the age of the latter, gender, social status, living environment, level of knowledge. In other words, the vocabulary, style, conceptual form of statements should evoke and maintain a positive reaction in the interlocutor and a desire to give complete and true information.

The duration and content of the introductory part of the conversation fundamentally depend on whether it will be the only one with this interlocutor or whether it can develop; what are the objectives of the study, etc.

At the initial stage of the conversation, the non-verbal behavior of the psychologist plays a special role in establishing and maintaining contact, indicating understanding and support of the interlocutor.

It is impossible to give a ready-made algorithm for the introductory part of the conversation, a repertoire of phrases and statements. It is important to have a clear idea of its goals and objectives in this conversation. Their consistent implementation, establishing a strong contact with the interlocutor allow us to move on to the next, second stage.

It is characterized by the presence of general open questions on the topic of the conversation, causing as many free statements as possible by the interlocutor, his presentation of his thoughts and experiences. This tactic allows the psychologist to accumulate certain factual event information.

Successful completion of this task allows you to move on to the stage of a detailed direct discussion of the main topic of the conversation (this logic of the development of the conversation is also implemented within the development of each private semantic topic: one should move from general open questions to more specific, concrete ones). Thus, the third stage of the conversation is a detailed study of the content of the issues under discussion.

This is the culmination of the conversation, one of its most difficult stages, since here everything depends only on the psychologist, on his ability to ask questions, listen to answers, and observe the behavior of the interlocutor. The content of the stage of such a study is completely determined by the specific goals and objectives of this conversation.

The final phase is the end of the conversation. The transition to it is possible after the successful and sufficiently complete completion of the previous stage of the study. As a rule, in one form or another, attempts are made to ease the tension that arises during the conversation, and appreciation for cooperation is expressed. If the conversation involves its subsequent continuation, then its completion should keep the interlocutor ready for further joint work.

Of course, the described stages of the conversation do not have rigid boundaries. The transitions between them are gradual and smooth. However, "jumping" through the individual phases of the conversation can lead to a sharp decrease in the reliability of the data received, disrupt the process of communication, the dialogue of the interlocutors.

List of sources used

Andreeva G.M. Social Psychology. Textbook for higher educational institutions - 5th ed. // M.: Aspect Press, 2002.
Bodalev A.A. Psychology about personality. - M., 1999.
Gippenreiter Yu.B. Introduction to general psychology. Lecture course. - M., 1999.
Maklakov A. G. General psychology. // Peter.: St. Petersburg, 2001

Description of work

Conversation is a method of studying human behavior that is specific to psychology, since in other natural sciences communication between the subject and the object of research is impossible. A dialogue between two people, during which one person reveals the psychological characteristics of the other, is called the method of conversation. Psychologists of various schools and trends widely use it in their research. Suffice it to name Piaget and the representatives of his school, humanistic psychologists, the founders and followers of "depth" psychology, and so on.

This is a conversation that allows you to get information about the motives of behavior, identify necessary features character, features of the subjective world of personality. As an independent method, conversation is intensively used in counseling, diagnostic and psycho-correctional psychology.

A conversation in psychology is a means of collecting data, as well as a tool for persuading, informing, and educating. It is used in the medical, legal, political, age-related branches of psychology.

Terms of the conversation

The qualified use of conversation in psychology is the use of fundamental knowledge, communication skills, and the competence of a practical psychologist as a specialist. Questions must be correctly asked and formulated, have a logical relationship with each other. But the main condition of the method is the trust of the respondent to the researcher.

A conversation in psychology should take place according to a pre-planned plan, be based on mutual trust, have the form of a dialogue, and not an interrogation, exclude suggestion or hint proposed as a question. A conversation in psychology is a question-answer method of communication between a researcher and a subject in a free form on a specific topic.

An important condition for conducting the method of conversation in psychology is the observance of confidentiality, ethical standards, and respect for the interlocutor. Auxiliary actions are provided by questioning to verify the reliability of the data and recording the conversation on a voice recorder.

The method of conversation is associated with external and internal observation, involving the receipt of non-verbal information and its comparison with verbal information: an assessment of the attitude of the subject to the researcher, the subject of conversation, the situation, the sincerity and responsibility of the individual.

Types of conversation

The types of conversation in psychology are divided into the following:

individual;
group - several subjects take part in the conversation;
structured or formalized;
standardized - increasing the ease of information processing, but reducing the degree of knowledge: incomplete information is not excluded;
non-standardized - takes place at ease, prepared questions are posed according to the circumstances of the conversation, which increases the complexity of data processing;
organizational: at - at the place of work, residence, in the office of a psychologist.

On the initiative, the following types of conversation are distinguished:

managed - takes place on the initiative of a psychologist who supports the topic of conversation. The disproportionality of the initiative can create the respondent's closeness, simplification of answers to monosyllabic ones;
uncontrollable - arises at the initiative of the defendant and can take the form of a confession, and the psychologist collects the necessary information for the set goals, using the ability to listen.

Conversation Structure

The stages of the conversation are not strictly limited, each of them can gradually move into the next one or be planned:

Introductory part. It plays a role in creating an atmosphere of conversation and creating an appropriate mood for the interlocutor. It is required to indicate the importance of the participation of the respondent in the conversation, to arouse his interest, to inform about the goals of the results. In addition, you need to indicate the time of testing, whether the survey will be the only one with this person, mention the confidentiality guarantee.
Second phase. The designation of questions that cause a maximum of free statements of the interlocutor on a given topic.
Third stage. Its task becomes a detailed study of the problems under discussion by moving from questions general to specific ones. The most difficult and active stage is the culmination of the conversation, in which the psychologist must listen, observe, ask questions, keeping the conversation going in the right direction.
Final stage. Attempts are made to ease the tension, expressing gratitude for participation.

Creating an atmosphere

The emancipation of the interlocutor has important role: in an atmosphere of sincerity, it becomes possible to obtain the most accurate information. The researcher must exclude circumstances that provoke the insincerity of the subject, such as the fear of looking incompetent, the prohibition of mentioning third parties, frankness in the intimate aspects of the issue, misunderstanding of the purpose of the conversation, fear of wrong conclusions.

The course of the conversation is formed at its very beginning, so the researcher needs to show the personality of the subject, his opinions, but avoid open agreement or denial of the point of view. It is permissible to express the attitude to the topic of conversation by facial expressions, gestures, intonation, raising additional questions, remarks of a specific type.

Perception of the interlocutor

Perception can be of two types: organizational allows you to correctly perceive the speech of the interlocutor, emotional, empathic is characterized by the ability to penetrate.

The psychologist should keep in mind that some remarks that imply a certain attitude towards the interlocutor can affect the course of the conversation until it is completely terminated.

Remarks with a touch of condemnation, praise, orders, threats, warnings, moralizing, humiliation, avoiding the problem, direct advice are undesirable. Such phrases violate the natural course of reasoning of the respondent and can cause a reaction of protection, irritation. The task of the psychologist is to direct the conversation in a direction appropriate to the goals.

Types of listening

Listening is divided into the following types:

Reflexive: its essence lies in the formation of a conversation with the help of an active speech intervention of a psychologist in the communication process. The main techniques of technology: clarification, paraphrasing, reflection of feelings, summing up.
the psychologist controls the conversation non-verbally: facial expressions, eye contact, gestures, choice of distance. The technique is useful in cases where the respondent expresses his own point of view, he needs to speak out, the interlocutor finds it difficult to solve urgent problems, feels insecure.

Conversation in psychology: advantages and disadvantages

The advantage of the conversation method is the prerequisites for the correct understanding of questions, taking into account the oral, more relaxed form of answers.

Disadvantages of conversation in psychology are:

large time costs, which special meaning in mass surveys;
the need for high professional skills to conduct an effective conversation;
the possibility of violation of objectivity on the part of the researcher, depending on his personality, professional skills and experience.

Combination of methods

The conversation is successfully used as a component of the main method, such as survey, observation, testing, experiment. Combining the methods of psychology - conversation, experiment, questioning, observation - provides comprehensive information that characterizes the person under study.

An experiment in psychology is a study under given conditions with the help of the indirect intervention of the researcher. It is possible to simulate an artificial situation, the circumstances in which the subject will manifest himself in a characteristic way for him.

The effectiveness of the conversation reflects an indicator of the general culture of a specialist and depends both on attention to words and on the ability to receive non-verbal information. The content of both types of information makes it possible to correctly interpret the data and improve the reliability of the results. A successfully organized conversation is a guarantee of the accuracy of the information received.

COURSE WORK

FEATURES OF CONVERSATION AS A METHOD OF PSYCHOLOGICAL COUNSELING

Introduction

The relevance of researchThis topic is of great importance, since the counseling conversation is the main means of psychological counseling.

For effective psychological impact, the spatial and temporal organization of the conversation is essential, although, of course, much of what can be said about this has already become common truths (Bodalev A.A., Stolin V.V., 1989; Aleshina Yu. E., Petrovskaya L.A., 1989).

The degree of development of the topic: The issues of conversation techniques were considered by many psychologists, such as: Abramova G.S., Ivy A.E., Aleshina Yu.E., George R., Zabrodin Yu.M., Kochyunas R., Lysenko E.M., Sytnik S.A. and many others.

As Problems researchthere is a contradiction between the need to study the features of the conversation as a method of psychological counseling, and the lack of research and systematization of data on this issue.

Purpose of the study: to identify the features of the conversation as the main method of psychological counseling.

Object of study: psychological counseling.

Subject of study: conversation as a method of psychological counseling

Hypothesis:conversation is the main method of psychological counseling and is characterized by its own characteristics: stages, methods, techniques and techniques.

Research objectives:

determine the place of conversation in psychological counseling;

to determine the features of the conversation as a method of psychological counseling;

to determine the methods and techniques and techniques of conducting a conversation in psychological counseling;

to systematize the methods of technique and methods of conducting a conversation as the main method of psychological counseling;

Research methodsto test the hypothesis and solve the tasks set, a complex research method was used, including various aspects: theoretical analysis of psychological literature on the problems under study - interpretation of scientific data, comparative analysis, systematization, generalization; methods of observation and conversation.

Scientific novelty of the research: systematized data on the conversation as the main method of psychological counseling.

Work structure: introduction, two chapters, conclusions for each chapter, bibliography.

1. Theoretical basis conversations as a method of psychological counseling

1.1 Conversation in psychology and psychological counseling

In a psychological conversation, there is direct interaction between the psychologist and the respondent in the form of an oral exchange of information. The conversation method is widely used in psychotherapy as a specific methodological technique. It is also used as an independent method in consultative, political, legal and labor psychology.

In the process of conversation, the psychologist, being a researcher, directs, covertly or explicitly, the conversation, during which he asks the person being interviewed questions. There are two types of conversation: managed and unmanaged (weakly managed conversation)

Conversations differ depending on the psychological task pursued. There are the following types of conversation:

Therapeutic conversation;

Experimental conversation (in order to test experimental hypotheses);

Autobiographical conversation;

Collection of subjective anamnesis (collection of information about the personality of the subject);

Collection of an objective anamnesis (collection of information about acquaintances of the subject);

telephone conversation;

The interview is referred to as the method of conversation, and the method of questioning.

There are two styles of conversation, and in its course one can replace the other depending on the context.

Reflective listening is a style of conversation that involves active verbal interaction between the psychologist and the respondent.

Reflective listening is used to accurately control the correctness of the perception of the information received. The use of this style of conversation may be associated with the personal characteristics of the respondent (for example, a low level of development of communication skills), the need to establish the meaning of the word that the speaker had in mind, cultural traditions (communication etiquette in the cultural environment to which the respondent and the psychologist belong ).

Non-reflexive listening is used in cases where there is a need to let the subject speak out. It is especially useful in situations where the interlocutor shows a desire to express his point of view, discuss topics of concern to him, and where he has difficulty expressing problems, is easily confused by the intervention of a psychologist, and behaves enslaved due to the difference in social position between the psychologist and the respondent.

Consultative conversation is one of the main methods of providing psychological assistance. Ascending to the sociological survey technique called "in-depth interview", a consultative conversation is a personality-oriented communication in which orientation is carried out in the personal characteristics and problems of the client, a partnership style of relationship is established and maintained (on an equal footing), the required psychological assistance is provided in accordance with needs, issues and nature of advisory work.

Aleshina defines psychological counseling as direct work with people aimed at solving various kinds of psychological problems associated with difficulties in interpersonal relationships, where the main means of influence is a conversation constructed in a certain way.

The direction of the locus of complaint and the readiness of a person determine the form of work with him. The main task of a counseling psychologist is to help the client look at their problems and life difficulties from the outside, to demonstrate and discuss those aspects of relationships that, being sources of difficulties, are usually not recognized and not controlled. The basis of this form of influence is, first of all, a change in the client's attitudes both to other people and to various forms of interaction with them. In the course of a consultative conversation, the client gets the opportunity to take a broader look at the situation, to assess his role in it differently and, in accordance with this new vision, change his attitude to what is happening and his behavior.

Thus, a conversation in psychology is defined as a psychological verbal-communicative method, which consists in conducting a thematically oriented dialogue between a psychologist and a respondent in order to obtain information from the latter.

In psychological counseling, conversation is one of the main methods of providing psychological assistance. Ascending to the sociological survey technique called "in-depth interview", a consultative conversation is a personality-oriented communication in which orientation is carried out in the personal characteristics and problems of the client, a partnership style of relationship is established and maintained (on an equal footing), the required psychological assistance is provided in accordance with needs, issues and nature of advisory work.

1.2 Stages of conversation in psychological counseling

conversation psychological counseling question

An advisory conversation can be compared to a literary work, which has its own prologue, plot development, plot, denouement, climax and epilogue. In other words, the conversation between a consultant and a client is far from being a random process; it is organized according to certain rules, following which makes it effective and purposeful. What are the basic rules for conducting a conversation in psychological counseling?

The first thing the consultant needs to do during the appointment is to meet and seat the client. The success of the conversation largely depends on how, from the very first minutes, the psychologist will be able to prove himself to be a friendly and interested interlocutor. The situation of the beginning of a conversation for a person who came to a psychologist for the first time is full of discomfort, he needs to be given time to look around, to come to his senses.

Very important point the beginning of the conversation - getting to know the client by name, the client may refuse to name himself, but forgetting or not inviting him to introduce himself - this means in many respects dooming the consultation to failure. It will be correct to introduce yourself in the same way as the client - by name, patronymic, just by name, etc. (There may be exceptions to this recommendation related to the age of the interlocutor, the specific conditions in which the consultation takes place, and, if necessary, adhere to the norms of communication of a certain ethnic culture.

It happens that at the beginning of the conversation, the consultant is faced with a situation where the client needs to explain what psychological counseling is, what he can count on when seeking help, and also to assure the anonymity of everything that happens behind the doors of the psychological office.

The next step to take is to go directly to the counseling process. It is natural to assume that it is first necessary for the client to talk about himself and his problems. This move is so logical that often clients themselves begin the story about themselves.

If the client is silent, waiting for what the consultant will say, he can be helped to start talking about himself with remarks like: “I listen to you carefully” or “Tell me what brought you here.” From the very beginning of the conversation, one should not forget that the advisory impact is, first of all, the impact through the word: one inaccurate wording or remark - and the client can be unsettled for a long time, take offense at the consultant, withdraw, feel insecure and lonely. And then the psychologist will have to spend a lot of time correcting the situation and restoring contact.

To establish good contact with the client, to organize the conversation correctly from the very beginning - this means, in many respects, to ensure the effectiveness of counseling. Unsuccessful contact with a person or issues not resolved at the beginning of the conversation can become an obstacle in the development of the conversation just when it is especially undesirable. Most often, it is they that serve as fertile ground for the formation of the client's resistance to psychological influence, which can manifest itself as unwillingness to continue the conversation, claims against the consultant, a sense of the meaninglessness of what is happening, etc.

Resistance to counseling is a common phenomenon at the beginning of a conversation, when the client, already in the psychologist's office, is still asking himself the question of whether he should have come here or not. It happens that a person who has asked for help starts a conversation with general topics and questions that have nothing to do with him personally - why there are so many divorces now, how the peculiarities of the current situation in the country affect relations between people, etc. Of course, you should not completely ignore the client's questions, but interest in the "fates of being" is almost never the basis for seeking advice.

The second step is asking the client.

After the problems of the beginning of the conversation were resolved, the client began a story about himself, thus moving the conversation to the next stage, where the main task of the consultant is to understand his problems as best as possible, to understand what the main conflicts and anxieties are connected with.

At this phase of the conversation, it often turns out that the way the client interprets his situation, what and how he sees the causes of his problems, is far from reality, contradictory, negatively characterizes other people, exposing the narrator in a positive light. But working with this material, disagreeing with the client, pointing out his mistakes, is not worth it at this stage. Usually, a psychologist does not yet have sufficient information, based on which one could correct a person’s point of view, and objections, expressions of disagreement only activate resistance, destroying the positive contact that is only being formed. At this stage, the principle of "accepting the concept of the client" should be followed. You should not be afraid that due to the fact that the psychologist at first did not express disagreement with what the client says about himself and the people around him, subsequently expressing the opposite opinion at the stage of corrective influence will be perceived by the interlocutor more negatively. On the contrary, often already in the course of the story, the client's point of view changes, he is preparing to accept a new view of himself and others, a different concept of what is happening.

The history of the problem is important (when and in connection with what it appeared); the relationship of the client with all the persons acting in his story, their attitude to the problem; an idea of what exactly caused the problem from the point of view of the person himself and the people around him; the deterioration and improvement of the situation that has ever occurred and what they could be connected with; what exactly caused the appeal to the consultation, why it happens right now, and not earlier or later. All the points mentioned above should be specifically asked for. The questions that can be formulated based on these points should be broad enough, and they usually stimulate the client well to tell.

Structuring the conversation is necessary for both the consultant and the client. The client should have a logical idea of what and why is being said and discussed at the moment. This, on the one hand, helps to avoid recurrences of resistance, since the client begins to feel that not only the consultant, but also himself is responsible for everything that happens during the appointment. In addition, understanding what is happening contributes to concentration, increasing emotional and intellectual activity during a conversation. Structuring the conversation is also useful for the consultant, because it allows you to use the consultation time more efficiently: if the client can easily trace where and how certain topics arise in the conversation, what exactly the newly emerging ideas are connected with, then, therefore, there is no need for something additional repeat or explain.

Each hypothesis is the counselor's attempt to understand the client's situation. At the same time, polls about what is actually happening, the real difficulties of the client's relationship with others, are absolutely meaningless. Objectivity in human relations is a very relative thing. Each participant looks at what is happening from his own point of view, based on his life experience, his own needs, interests, etc. And the notorious third party, who is usually assigned the role of a judge, is also not impartial: everyone has his own views on life and principles, and even those who, for the sake of truth, try to free themselves from them for a while, cannot go far from themselves.

But if the consultant is not a judge and is not engaged in an objective analysis of the situation, what is the psychological impact based on?

Hypotheses in psychological counseling are, in fact, options for more constructive positions in a situation, probable ways of reorienting the client in his attitude to his problems.

The counselor's hypotheses are based on what the client says about himself and his problems. But this is only the basis for their construction. An inexperienced or unprofessional consultant builds his hypotheses anew at each appointment, having nothing in reserve. But for a professional who is well acquainted with various theoretical and practical developments in the field of counseling and psychotherapy, the client's story is a set of behavioral patterns interpreted from the point of view of one or another developed concept.

A conceptual vision of what the client is talking about greatly facilitates the work, allows you to better interpret the material, quickly find what can help in the current situation, operate big amount ideas to understand what is going on. And the more ideas in the hypothesis that the consultant has about certain statements of the client, the more he is professionally equipped, the easier it is for him to work. But a professional should be able not only to comprehend what the client says, but also to convey, formulate his vision of the situation in such a way that the person who asked for help could understand and accept it. The hypothesis verbally expressed by the counselor is an interpretation. Interpretation is the cornerstone of psychotherapy, the turning point of the counseling process. Z. Freud, who first began to write about this, could hardly imagine how many books and magazines would be devoted to the influence of interpretation on the client in the future. One of the important differences between psychological and medical reception is that in medicine the diagnosis is made by one person - the doctor and communicates it to another - the patient, while the consultant chooses a more constructive position together with the client. The described process can be explained by the following metaphor: the hypotheses and interpretations of the consultant and the view of the problem, which is ultimately accepted by the client, differ like a semi-finished dress standard size and a dress of the same fabric and the same style, but specially tailored for the person. The hypothesis accepted by the client is overgrown with many significant and characteristic facts and experiences only for him, that is, it is maximally individualized.

Before giving an interpretation, trying to change the client's idea of what is happening, the consultant must first formulate for himself quite unambiguously what is happening in the client's life, that is, checking the hypotheses that have arisen in him, he must stop at one that is most suitable for this person in specific situation.

What means does the consultant have to test the hypotheses that have arisen? If in the first phase of the questioning the consultant asked broad questions provoking the client into a monologue, then in the second phase the nature of the questions changes fundamentally. The wording becomes more subtle, aimed at clarifying the consultant's ideas. The counselor should strive to ensure that the client's answers correspond to the nature of the questions being asked, that is, they are accurate and specific. Wording like: "often" or "for a long time" is not suitable here. For some, often - it's once a week, for someone - every day. The more accurate the client's answer, the more objective it is, the more it can be considered not only from the point of view of how the client used to perceive his situation, but also from the point of view of the hypotheses and interpretations that arose from the consultant.

The main and, perhaps, the most reliable approach for the consultant to work at the second stage of the questioning is the analysis of specific situations from the client's life, clearly demonstrating his relationships with people, behavior in problem situations, and features of the chosen patterns of interaction. Working with specific situations is one of the most reliable ways for a consultant to test his hypotheses. It is widely known that the more a person talks about something, the more specific details in the story, the less the imprint of subjectivity and one-sidedness, and the more opportunities for the consultant to understand those aspects of reality that are not perceived or noticed by the narrator. Small details of the situation are more difficult to invent or distort, and they become a kind of filters through which information that is unconscious or underestimated by the client passes. But what is it - a complete, detailed story about a specific situation, what are the main requirements for it?

A detailed story should reflect when exactly and in connection with what the described situation arose, where exactly it happened, who took part in it, what exactly the client and other actors said and did, what he thought and felt at the time when events unfolded, what, from the point of view of the client, other participants in the situation thought and felt at that time, how this situation ended, what consequences it had and what it had an impact on.

Let's imagine that a speech at a psychologist's appointment turned to a family conflict, and the wife talks about it. In order for her story to be considered as a specific situation, the client must report what each of the spouses did before the start of the quarrel, how the quarrel went, when exactly the client felt that she was wound up and in connection with what, because of which, with her point of view, this feeling arose, what she herself said and what her husband answered her, what caused the quarrel from his point of view (according to the client’s assumption), how and in connection with what the quarrel was stopped, how events unfolded further, how long the relationship was tense, what are the consequences of this quarrel for their relationship.

Only after hearing such a full story, the consultant can confirm or refute the hypothesis, for example, that the wife herself first provokes conflicts in order to use them later as a means of pressure on her husband, posing as a victim. Clients' self-report is never so complete as to immediately satisfy the psychologist, and a detailed questioning usually follows the description of the situation.

The client does not always easily answer the questions asked by the psychologist. Often you have to spend quite a lot of effort to ensure that the answers are detailed and describe real feelings and experiences, and would not be reasoning on the topic. If at the first stage of the questioning the position of the psychologist can be described as passive, then here it becomes, if possible, active, the consultant offers alternatives, asks detailed questions, stimulating, if possible, the client's memory. It happens that the client believes that he completely forgot some points. In such a situation, the psychologist should encourage him: “Remember at least something”, “It doesn’t matter if this somewhat does not correspond to what actually happened, but you can, knowing your life, imagine as fully as possible how it could be ".

Another often encountered difficulty for the client in such a story is the description of his own experiences and the feelings of other people. It is feelings and experiences that should primarily interest the consultant, since they usually reflect reality more deeply, speak more about the unconscious (according to Freud's theory), often hidden for the client himself, desires and conflicts that underlie his problems. Most people listen to themselves a little, do not know how to analyze their experiences. What the consultant can do to better analyze the feelings and experiences of the client will be discussed in more detail in the next chapter, but here I would like to emphasize that the psychologist should be persistent, helping the client in every possible way. For example, offer various alternatives, encourage: “So you got angry or scared when you heard this?”, “Try to describe your feelings. After all, even if you did not pay attention to it special attention, yet you simply could not feel anything at that moment. In a person's life there are always not only thoughts, but also feelings.

Especially often one hears from clients: “I find it difficult to answer” when it comes to the experiences and condition of others. In this situation, the client can be assured that the consultant has enough guesswork. And this is true, since the psychologist needs the features of the experiences and behavior of other people, first of all, in order to understand how the client perceives and evaluates them.

In order for the consultant's hypothesis to be confirmed or refuted, it is not enough to discuss one specific situation; at least two or three such examples are needed. And only if the same pattern of behavior and experience can be traced in all the situations discussed, the consultant's hypothesis can be considered confirmed or refuted.

Are there any guidelines for selecting situations to ask the client about? After all, each story requires time and hard work, therefore, its choice should certainly not be random.

The selected situations should be closely related to the content of the main complaints of the client, with those moments of interpersonal relationships that are difficult, problematic.

The situations discussed should be typical, frequently encountered in the life of the client, so that they can be used to judge the features of the relationship as a whole.

It is desirable that these situations be sufficiently detailed, describing integral patterns of interaction, that is, negative, positive and neutral characteristics of relations.

Thus, a mother's complaints that her daughter does not take care of the order in the apartment and usually scatters her things everywhere cannot serve as an example of a specific situation. As such, a mother-daughter conversation can be chosen here, which begins from the moment when the mother, having come home, finds books and clothes scattered, begins to get angry with her daughter, feels offended and, going up to her, says: “Again, everything is different.” old." A skilled professional can easily expand this situation further, finding out why exactly she was offended by her daughter, what she answered and thought, etc.

Most often it happens that after two or three such specific situations have been discussed, the consultant can say with confidence which of the hypotheses turned out to be the most suitable, what kind of behavior of the client leads to the fact that problems arise in his life, how he can be helped to relate to what is happening differently and behave accordingly. This means that you can move on to the next phase of the consultative conversation - to provide a psycho-corrective impact, to interpret what is happening.

What exactly is the psycho-correctional impact, what is its effectiveness, can be described for a very long time. Different schools of psychotherapy and their authors emphasize the importance of various factors in the provision of psychocorrectional influence; the leading role in this is given to catharsis, and changes in personal structures, and the acquisition of meaning, etc.

What are the possibilities of providing psycho-correctional impact [tab. 1], are there any techniques that can be used in dialogue to help solve this problem? Perhaps the easiest way to make an impact, which is effective when the conversation is well organized and logically built by the consultant and fully uses the possibilities of case analysis, is to emphasize the contradictions in the client's story, reformulate and restructure the reality surrounding him. Since not only the consultant is actively working during the reception, but also the client, rethinking his life in a new way, even such a slight push may be enough for the client to see what is happening differently. By such a statement, without trying to discover any new "depths of truth", the consultant, nevertheless, offers a different vision of his life situation, unusual for the client. Even if the client's response does indicate a new vision of the situation, this does not mean at all that the work of the psychologist is over. The task of the consultant at this stage is to once again carefully analyze the characteristics of the client's behavior that underlie the problems, without losing sight of the fundamental question: what exactly does the client seek to achieve with his behavior, what needs is he trying to satisfy. Any inadequate neurotic behavior is always beneficial to the client on some level, since in one way or another it satisfies those unconscious needs that, for whatever reason, cannot be satisfied in any other way. The tasks of psycho-correctional influence can be considered realized only in the case when a peculiar chain of events is built not only in the mind of the consultant, but also in the mind of the client.

Completion of the conversation - it would seem that after the psycho-correctional influence is carried out, the conversation can end. Formally, this is undoubtedly true, but just as in a novel there is an epilogue, so in a conversation one more stage is necessary, during which the psychologist must carry out a number of activities, without the implementation of which the effectiveness of even the most successful impact can be significantly reduced. These include the following: 1) summarizing the conversation (a brief summary of everything that happened during the reception); 2) discussion of issues related to further relations of the client with a consultant or other necessary specialists; 3) parting of the consultant with the client.

In the book "Fundamentals of Psychological Counseling" R. Kociunas gives an eclectic model of the structure of the consultative process, proposed by V.E. Gilland et al.: "This system model, covering six closely related stages, reflects the universal features of psychological counseling of any orientation." Let's list these stages.

Researching problems - establishing contact with the client and achieving mutual trust.

Two-dimensional definition of problems - the desire of the consultant to accurately characterize the client's problems, establishing both their cognitive and emotional aspects, clarifying the problems, achieving the same understanding of them by the client and the consultant.

Identification of alternatives - finding out and open discussion possible alternatives for problem solving.

Planning is the critical evaluation of decision alternatives.

Activities - consistent implementation of the problem-solving plan.

Assessment and Feedback- joint assessment of the level of achievement of the goal and generalization of the achieved results [table 2].

2. Theoretical foundations of conversation as a method of psychological counseling

.1 Conversation in psychological counseling

A conversation can be used in counseling for several purposes:

To identify charged areas for follow-up work.

To narrow down an area and then apply a more specific technique to it.

As a standalone process to clarify the area for the client.

The first use of the conversation is usually at the beginning of the session, when nothing seems to disturb the client. The goal of the psychologist is not at first to clarify something, but simply to find what needs to be clarified.

The second use of conversation is to enter into another technique. There is a common charged region, but you need to figure out exactly what is happening in order to know what to do with it. As soon as the consultant receives enough information, he switches to a more powerful technique.

The third use of conversation is as an independent process. We start with a charged area. We bring it to completion with just one conversation.

The purpose of the conversation process is for both the counselor and the client to understand the topic to such an extent that it either becomes clear to the client or he knows what to do with it. The goal is to reach a mutual understanding of what it is and for the client to take responsibility for it. In the process of achieving this, the theme may dissolve, and this will be the completion of the process.

When conducting a conversation, like any other process, a counseling psychologist does not try to find out exactly what the client's problem is. There is no one thing that he would be looking for. Together, the psychologist and the client try to bring to light new material, provide more perspectives, loosen things up, and so on. What exactly this means depends on the client.

The point of having a conversation is not just to encourage the client to talk. There is a two-way dialogue. The counselor helps the client to clarify the topic by asking appropriate questions. He encourages the client to keep looking at and describing what is there until they reach a result.

To help the client, the consultant can ask a variety of questions on the topic: possible reasons, ideas, thoughts, opinions, information, solutions to a problem, attempts at a solution, failed solutions, sensations, feelings, remedies, improvement, attempts to get rid of, help, time, place, state and event, who, what, where, when and how what can be done about it, is it possible to take responsibility for it, how things would be without it.

And any other questions that help clarify what we're talking about. Both the consultant and the client should be interested in finding out everything about the topic. The counselor doesn't just choose what else to say to keep the client talking, he tries to encourage the client to discover something new.

The main thing not to do in a conversation is not to be indecisive about what we are working on. The consultant tries to clarify the initial topic, no matter what else the client says along the way. The psychologist always returns to the main theme.

Any question is intended to help the client consider the topic, not to push the consultant's ideas. The consultant can find out what the client said, help him sum it up, but he does not add his own assessments to it.

If it turns out that the issue under discussion is not suitable for one conversation only, the consultant switches to suitable technique:

Fixed ideas correspond to unfixed steps;

Traumatic incidents correspond to a re-experiencing procedure; separation into opposites corresponds to the union of opposites, and so on.

But this is only if the main topic of the conversation turned out to be not as expected. Any pop-up information about other charged regions is simply noted for later use.

Also, if the conversation does not lead to anything, you can switch to something stronger or more precise. Or you can use the offload or unlock keys to cover the area more systematically.

Conversation is the main processing. This is one of the most important techniques to master. But for a consultant accustomed to mechanical procedures, the conversation can be difficult. It has no mechanical procedures.

But with understanding of the definition of processing, with exercises and practice, it becomes very simple.

.2 Conversation Techniques: Special Questions and Clarifying Techniques

To a person far from psychological counseling, it may seem that there is nothing special in the way the consultant talks with his client: one of the interlocutors simply tells the other what worries him. No matter how paradoxical at first glance the statement that the less a person seeking psychological help perceives the role of a consultant as a leader, the better, it is undoubtedly true. In such a situation, the client is more active, more easily accepts and discusses the comments and interpretations offered to him, more constructively approaches the problem of the need to change his behavior and attitudes.

You can professionally master the skill of conducting a consultative dialogue only in practice, working together with a trainer or supervisor who would comment on inaccuracies, point out and correct errors in work. It is for this that in the process of training consultants are widely used modern facilities audio and video recordings that allow you to more carefully record each step in the development of a consultative conversation. Nevertheless, below we will formulate some basic principles for organizing a dialogue with a client, comment on the possibilities of using some work techniques in counseling, knowledge and understanding of which can greatly help novice consultants.

Use of paradoxical questions. As an example, take the following dialogue between a consultant and a client:

Client: But I myself never swear, I don’t argue with my mother-in-law, she tells me all this, but I am silent.

Consultant: Shut up… why?

Client: And what, in fact, can I tell her? That she is a fool and everything she says is absolute nonsense?

Consultant: And why don't you really say all this, since you think so?

Client: Well, that's rude, and most importantly, she still won't understand anything.

Consultant: What would you like her to understand?

Let's dwell on this point in the dialogue, and then return to it in a few pages. Let's try to carefully analyze the various forms of the consultant's remarks. The second line is an example of a paradoxical question, the purpose of which is to question what the client takes as absolutely obvious or self-evident. Generally accepted truths such as “it’s not good to be rude”, “parents always know best what a child needs” are attitudes and usually serve as a reliable cover for true feelings and experiences of the client. The easiest way to deal with such statements is to question them, to make the client think about what is hidden behind such maxims for him personally. The wording of such a question is usually quite simple: “Why not…?” Many people need only a little push to start thinking about a previously unquestioned topic.

Paradoxical questions are not uncommon in consultative dialogue. Often in a conversation there is a moment when (as in the example above) the client has an obvious, from his point of view, answer that does not at all contribute to rethinking or constructively resolving the situation. The task of the consultant is to challenge this inherently dead-end answer by asking a paradoxical question. Of course, this question is paradoxical only at first glance, it is not difficult to find an answer to it, it is enough to begin to doubt that from the standpoint of the ordinary common sense seems obvious.

Statement of questions. Obtaining information about the client and encouraging him to introspection is impossible without skillful questioning.

As you know, questions are usually divided into closed and open questions. Closed questions are used to obtain specific information and usually require a one or two word answer, confirmation or denial (“yes”, “no”). For example: “How old are you?”, “Can we meet in a week at the same time?”, “How many times have you had fits of anger?” etc.

Open-ended questions are not so much about learning about the lives of clients as they are about discussing feelings. Benjamin (1987) notes:

“Open questions broaden and deepen contact; closed questions limit it. The former open the doors wide to good relationships, the latter usually leave them closed.”

Examples of open questions: “Where would you like to start today?”, “How do you feel now?”, “What made you sad?” etc.

Open-ended questions provide an opportunity to share your concerns with the consultant. They give the client responsibility for the conversation and encourage him to explore his attitudes, feelings, thoughts, values, behavior, i.e. his inner world. (1971) highlights the main points of counseling when open-ended questions are used:

The beginning of the consultation meeting (“Where would you like to start today?”, “What happened during the week that we did not see each other?”).

Encouraging the client to continue or complete what was said (“How did you feel when this happened?”, “What else would you like to say about this?”, “Can you add anything to what you said?”).

Encouraging the client to illustrate their problems with examples so that the counselor can better understand them (“Can you talk about any particular situation?”),

Focusing the client's attention on feelings ("What do you feel when you tell me?", "What did you feel when all this happened to you?").

We should not forget that not all clients like open-ended questions; for some, they increase the sense of threat and increase anxiety. This does not mean that such questions should be avoided, but they should be carefully formulated and asked at the right time when there is a chance of getting an answer.

Counseling uses both closed and open questions, but the importance of surveys should not be overestimated in general. Benjamin (1987) points out:

“I am very skeptical about the use of questions in a conversation and feel like I am asking too many questions, often meaningless ones. We ask questions that upset the client, interrupt him, and questions that he may not be able to answer. Sometimes we even ask questions, knowingly not wanting to receive answers, and as a result we do not listen to answers.

Although questioning is an important technique in counseling, however, paradoxically, I dare say that excessive questioning should be avoided in counseling. Any question must be justified - asking it, you need to know for what purpose it is asked. This is a very difficult problem for a novice consultant, who often worries too much about what else to ask the client, and forgets that, first of all, the client must be listened to. If interrogation is turned into the main technique of counseling, then counseling will turn into interrogation or investigation. In such a situation, the client will leave the counselor's office with the feeling that he was not so much understood and called to emotional participation in the counseling contact as interrogated.

Too much questioning during counseling creates many problems (George, Cristiani, 1990):

turns the conversation into an exchange of questions and answers, and the client begins to constantly wait for the consultant to ask about something else;

forces the consultant to take full responsibility for the course of counseling and the topics of the problems discussed;

moves the conversation from emotionally colored topics to a discussion of the facts of life;

"destroys" the mobile nature of the conversation.

For these reasons, budding consultants are generally discouraged from asking clients questions, except at the very beginning of counseling.

There are a few other rules to keep in mind when asking questions to clients:

Questions "Who, what?" most often focused on facts, i.e. questions of this type increase the likelihood of factual answers.

Questions "How?" more focused on a person, his behavior, inner world.

Questions "Why?" often provoke defensive reactions of clients, so they should be avoided in counseling. Asking a question of this type, most often you can hear answers based on rationalization, intellectualization, since it is not always easy to explain the real reasons for one’s behavior (and “why” questions are primarily directed at them), due to many rather contradictory factors.

It is necessary to avoid posing several questions at the same time (sometimes other questions are included in one question). For example, “How do you understand your problem? Have you ever thought about your problems before?”, “Why do you drink and fight with your wife?” In both cases, it may not be clear to the client which of the questions to answer, because the answers to each part of the double question may be completely different.

The same question should not be asked in different formulations. It becomes unclear to the client which of the options to answer. Such behavior of the consultant when asking questions indicates his anxiety. The consultant should "voice" only the final versions of the question.

You can’t ask a question ahead of the client’s answer. For example, the question “Is everything going well?” most often encourages the client to give an affirmative answer. In this case, it is better to ask an open question: “How are things at home?” In such situations, clients often take the opportunity to give a vague answer, such as: "Not bad." The consultant needs to clarify the answer with another question of this type: “What does “not bad” mean to you?” This is very important, since we often put quite different content into the same concepts.

Clarifying and deepening formulations. Let's see how the above dialogue develops further. Recall that the last remark belonged to the client and sounded like this:

Client: That I am also a person, that I am not so bad ...

Consultant: That is, you would like your mother-in-law to understand how good you are, so that she would finally appreciate you.

Client: Well, yes, but it's hardly possible.

Let's analyze the consultant's remark. Such formulations, in which what the client said is deepened and clarified, are often found in the dialogue. This group of statements includes both clarifying questions like “How did you feel your confusion?”, And reformulation of what was said: “You felt confused, that is, you got the feeling that you do not understand what is happening?”, And remarks that deepen what was expressed by the client feelings: "You have lost the feeling that someone needs you, that someone is really interested in your presence." The use of such formulations allows you to gradually transfer the client's story from the level of more superficial to deeper experiences. It is important that the careful, step-by-step use of such comments allows, without entering into a confrontation with the client and without provoking resistance, to more accurately characterize his state and experiences, expand the area of realized and understood by him and, thus, pave the way for corrective action.

Clarifying and reformulating, the psychologist should in no case go beyond the obvious for the client, each step should logically follow from the previous one, as, for example, in the dialogue we are discussing, the phrases “how good you are” and “appreciated” are directly related to each other. another, but the second of them is undoubtedly stronger and more emotionally charged than the first. The purpose of clarifications usually consists in a fuller, more multifaceted coverage of what is happening with a person and linking the facts received with his relationship with others. So, if in the wording “how good you are” the mother-in-law is completely absent, then “appreciated” already clearly refers to her, indicates a certain nature of the client’s relationship, without unambiguously naming what these relationships are, and due to this, without causing the latter premature resistance to the consultant's remarks. Thus, in a certain sense, the psychologist, as it were, “lures” the interlocutor into the “depth of his own experiences”, helps to look into the still unknown corners of his own emotions, preparing him to accept the interpretation.

Thus, the conversation about the technology of conducting a consultative conversation can be continued for a very long time. In addition, each experienced professional has his own tricks and "tricks" that help in working with a variety of clients. But to conclude this section, I would like to repeat once again: in order to master all these techniques at a really high level, you need long hours of work under the supervision of an experienced professional supervisor. Only in this case, you can see yourself from the outside, understand and reflect on a lot that would otherwise go unnoticed.

Bibliographic list

1.Aleshina Yu.E. Individual and family psychological counseling. - Ed. 2nd. - M.: Independent firm "Class", 1999. - 208 p. - (Library of psychology and psychotherapy).

2.Bondarenko A.F. Psychological assistance: theory and practice. - Ed. 3rd, rev. and additional - M.: Independent firm "Class", 2001. - 336 p. - (Library of Psychology and Psychotherapy, issue 94).

.Boronova G.Kh. Psychology of work: Lecture notes / G.Kh. Boronova, N.V. Trusova. - M.: Eksmo, 2008. - 160 p.

.Gladding, S. Psychological counseling / S. Gladding. - St. Petersburg: Peter, 2002. - 736 p.

.George, R. Counseling: theory and practice. Per. from English. A. Shadura / R. George, T. Christiani. - M.: Eksmo, 2002. - 448 p.

.Dubrovina I.V. etc. Psychology: Textbook for students. avg. ped. textbook institutions / I.V. Dubrovina, E.E. Danilova, A.M. parishioners; Ed. I.V. Dubrovina - M.: Publishing Center "Academy", 1999. - 464 p.

.Zabrodin, Yu.M. Psychological counseling / Zabrodin Yu.M., Pakhalyan V.E.: ed. Ed. Yu.M. Zabrodin. - M.: Eksmo, 2010. - 384 p.

.Karvasarsky B.D. Clinical Psychology: Textbook 3rd Edition / Ed. B.D. Karvasarsky - St. Petersburg: Piter, 2008. - 960 p.

.Kociunas R. Fundamentals of psychological counseling. M.: "Academic project" M., 1999 - 150 p.

.Maklakov A.G. M 15 General psychology: a textbook for universities. - St. Petersburg: Peter, 2008. - 583 p.

.Menovshchikov, V.Yu. Introduction to psychological counseling / V.Yu. Changers. - M.: Meaning, 2000. - 109 p.

.Meshcheryakova B., Psychology. Complete encyclopedic reference book / Comp. And common. Ed. B. Meshcheryakova, V. Zinchenko. - St. Petersburg: prime - EUROZNAK, 2007. - 896 p.

.May, R. The Art of Psychological Counseling. Per. from English. T.K. Kruglova / R. May. - M.: Independent firm "Class", 1994. - 144 p.

.Nemov R.S.N50 Fundamentals of psychological counseling: Proc. for stud. pedagogical universities. - M.: Humanit. ed. center VLADOS, 1999. - 394 p.

.Osipova A.A. General psychocorrection. Textbook for university students - M.: TC Sphere, 2008. - 512 p.

.Palatkina G.V. Ethnopedagogy [text]: tutorial/ G.V. Palatkin. - Astrakhan: Astrakhan University Publishing House 2008. - 270, p.

Tutoring

Need help learning a topic?

Our experts will advise or provide tutoring services on topics of interest to you.
Submit an application indicating the topic right now to find out about the possibility of obtaining a consultation.

What else to read

Orthodox Charitable Foundation "Alatyr" The Vicar of the Holy Trinity Monastery, the city of Alatyr, Archimandrite Jerome (Shurygin) - Father, departed to the Lord ...

Pukhtitsa: an uninterrupted tradition of female monasticism Protodeacon of the Russian Orthodox Church Andrey Kuraev in LiveJournal told his version of the origin of about 300...

St. Anastasius Stauropegial Convent St. Anastasius Monastery in Zhytomyr has already managed to become one of the most...