Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer
FrancoAngeli Journals

Commentaries

No. 2 (2022)

Generating a beneficial creative chaos to manage compartmentalization in psychology: A trans-disciplinary approach to intertwine plurality and unity

DOI
https://doi.org/10.3280/rpc2-2022oa14879
Submitted
novembre 4, 2022
Published
2023-01-24

Abstract

The search for a composition between plurality and unity of psychology is developed here by articulating a reflection on three points concerning:

  1. the origins of the phenomenon of compartmentalization that can be traced back to a dual configuration - plural and fragmented - of psychology; characteristics that are connected but not coincidental;
  2. the acceptability of a trans-disciplinary approach to design a composition of psychology that respects its plural articulation;
  3. the choice of the area of health as the elective phenomenical field to test the possibility of composing the plurality and unity of psychology starting from a trans-disciplinary approach.

References

  1. Aagaard‐Hansen, J. (2007). The challenges of cross‐disciplinary research. Social Epistemology, 21(4), 425-438.
  2. Agazzi, E. (1976). Criteri epistemologici fondamentali delle discipline psicologiche. In G. Siri (ed.). Problemi epistemologici della psicologia (pp. 3-35). Milano: Vita e Pensiero.
  3. Baldwin, M. A. (2008). Concept analysis as a method of inquiry. Nurse Researcher, 15(2).
  4. Basli, G. (2015). Ontologia formale: uno strumento per il dialogo interculturale e interdisciplinare. Ontologia Formale, 13, 137.
  5. Bernstein, J. H. (2015). Trans-disciplinarity: A review of its origins, development, and current issues. City University of New York (CUNY) Academic Works.
  6. Bosio, A. C. (2011). Fare lo psicologo. Percorsi e prospettive di una professione (pp. 1-137). Milano: Cortina.
  7. Bosio, A. C. (2012). Percorsi dell’applicare: considerazioni e intrecci da un punto di vista psicologico-organizzativo. Risorsa Uomo. Rivista di Psicologia del Lavoro e dell’Organizzazione, 119-128.
  8. Bosio, A. C. (2021). Virus, narrazione sociale e ruolo della scienza. Vita e Pensiero, 1, 28-35.
  9. Bosio, A. C. (2022a). Costruire valore abilitante per la laurea in psicologia: implicazioni per la psicologia della salute. Psicologia della Salute, 2, 9-11.
  10. Bosio, A. C. (2022b). La transizione pandemica: “Lesson learned” per la psicologia e gli psicologi? Rivista di Psicologia Clinica, 16(2), 3-11.
  11. Bosio, A. C., & Lozza, E. (2021). La costruzione sociale delle professioni psicologiche in Italia: percorsi e agenda building. Giornale italiano di psicologia, 48(2), 357-376.
  12. Bosio, A. C., & Morelli, L. (2015). Trans-disciplinarità: prove di dialogo fra scienze. Vita e Pensiero, 5, 123-129.
  13. Bosio, A. C., Barello, S., & Graffigna, G. (2021). Uno scenario transdisciplinare per la salute: nuovo paradigma per la psicologia e gli psicologi?. Psicologia della Salute, 2, 17-33.
  14. Cacioppo, J. T. (2002). Social neuroscience: understanding the pieces fosters understanding the whole and vice versa. American Psychologist, 57(11), 819.
  15. Graffigna, G., & Barello, S. (2018). Engagement: un nuovo modello di partecipazione in sanità. Roma: Pensiero Scientifico Editore.
  16. Guarino, N., & Musen, M. (2015). Applied ontology: The next decade begins. Applied Ontology, 10(1).
  17. Guizzardi, G., & Halpin, T. (2008). Ontological foundations for conceptual modelling. Applied Ontology, 3(1-2), 1-12.
  18. Henriques, G. R. (2004). Psychology defined. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 60(12), 1207-1221.
  19. Hibberd, F. J., & Petocz, A. (2022). Philosophy, realism, and psychology’s disciplinary fragmentation. Philosophical Psychology, 1-29.
  20. Kazdin, A. (2008). Unity: Psychology’s immunity booster. Monitor on Psychology. https://www.apa.org/monitor/2008/03/pc.
  21. Laurence, S., & Margolis, E. (2003). Concepts and conceptual analysis. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 67(2), 253-282.
  22. Marsh, T., & Boag, S. (2014). Unifying psychology: Shared ontology and the continuum of practical assumptions. Review of General Psychology, 18(1), 49-59.
  23. Martin, J., Sugarman, J., & Slaney, K. L. (eds.) (2015). The Wiley handbook of theoretical and philosophical psychology: Methods, approaches, and new directions for social sciences. Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons.
  24. Nicolescu, B., & Ertas, A. (2008). Trans-disciplinary theory and practice. USA, TheATLAS.
  25. Polanyi, M. (2009). The tacit dimension. In Knowledge in organizations (pp. 135-146). Abingdon, England; New York, NY: Routledge.
  26. Polk, M. (2014). Achieving the promise of trans-disciplinarity: a critical exploration of the relationship between trans-disciplinary research and societal problem solving. Sustainability Science, 9(4), 439-451.
  27. Raatikainen, P. (2013). Intuitionistic logic and its philosophy. Al-Mukhatabat. A Trilingual Journal for Logic, Epistemology and Analytical Philosophy (6).
  28. Salvatore, S., Andò, A., Ruggieri, R. A., Bucci, F., Cordella, B., Freda, M. F., Lombardo, C., Coco, G. L., Novara, C., Petito, A., Schimmenti, A.,
  29. Vegni, E., Venuleo, C., Zagaria, A. & Zennaro, A. (2022). Compartmentalization and unity of professional psychology. A road map for the future of the discipline. Rivista di Psicologia Clinica/Journal of Clinical Psychology (1), 7-33.
  30. Scholz, R. W., & Steiner, G. (2015). The real type and ideal type of transdisciplinary processes: part I – theoretical foundations. Sustainability Science, 10(4), 527-544.
  31. Schweizer-Ries, P., & Perkins, D. D. (2012). Sustainability science: Transdisciplinarity, transepistemology, and action research. Umweltpsychologie (Environmental Psychology), 16, 6-11.
  32. Stam, H. J. (2015). The neurosciences and the search for a unified psychology: The science and esthetics of a single framework. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 1467.
  33. Stilgoe, J. (2009). Citizen Scientists: reconnecting science with civil society. London: Demos.
  34. Tobón, S. (2018). Conceptual analysis of the socioformation according to the knowledge society. Knowledge Society and Quality of Life (KSQL), 1(1), 9-35.
  35. Van Bewer, V. (2017, October). Trans-disciplinarity in health care: a concept analysis. Nursing Forum, 52(4), 339-347.
  36. Walsh-Bowers, R. (2010). Some social-historical issues underlying psychology’s fragmentation. New Ideas in Psychology, 28(2), 244-252.
  37. Ward, T., Haig, B. D., & McDonald, M. (2022). Translating science into practice in clinical psychology: A reformulation of the evidence-based practice inquiry model. Theory & Psychology, 32(3), 401-422.
  38. Wenger, E. (2009). Communities of practice: The key to knowledge strategy. In Knowledge and communities (pp. 3-20). Abingdon, England; New York, NY: Routledge.
  39. Wertz, F. J. (2015). Methods, historical development, and applications in psychology. The Wiley handbook of theoretical and philosophical psychology: Methods, approaches, and new directions for social sciences, 85.
  40. Yanchar, S. C., & Slife, B. D. (2000). Putting it all together: toward a hermeneutic unity of psychology. The Journal of Mind and Behavior, 315-326.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...