Abstract
This paper describes an action research study that illustrates the potential of group discussion to enhance reflexivity on professionals’ theoretical and technical models that foster a change in their practice when facing contemporary family diversity. Focus groups were carried out with thirty-five experienced professionals (females, N = 22; males, N = 12; mean age = 45 years) working in the Italian Health Care System (IHCS). Group discussions centered on clinical cases involving same-sex families, an emerging phenomenon in Italy and still subject to social stigma. Our results showed that group discussion allowed professionals to develop a communicative process through which they changed their initial prejudiced positions. This process was named the group re-orienting process and four progressive phases were recognized: (a) defense (b) familiarization with novelty (c) self-reflection and (d) generation. Each phase is described in detail using extracts from focus group data. Implications for training and intervention are discussed.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
According to Moscovici (1961), familiarization is the process through which representations are formed, reducing the problem posed by novelty, and allowing the individual to handle the transformation of representations, relying on and yet transforming aspects of consolidated knowledge. For more detail on this topic see also Duveen and Loyd (1990) and Jodelet (1991).
References
Beier L, Hofacker D, Marchese E, Rupp M (2010) Family structures and family forms. Working report. Family platform. http://www.familyplatform.eu/en/1-major-trends/reports. Accessed 21 July 2012
Bernal G (2006) Intervention development and cultural adaptation research with diverse families. Fam Process 45:143–151
Binger JJ, Gottlieb AR (eds) (2007) Interventions with families of gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender people: from the inside out. Taylor & Francis, New York
Borrill CS, Carletta J, Carter AJ, Dawson J, Garrod S, Rees A, Richards A, Shapiro D, West MA (2000) The effectiveness of health care teams in the National Health Service. Aston Centre for Health Service Organization Research, Birmingham
Brits H, du Plessis L (2007) Application of focus group interviews for quality management: an action research project. Syst Pract Action Res 2:117–126
Capozzi P, Lingiardi V (2003) Happy Italy? The Mediterranean experience of homosexuality, psychoanalysis and mental health professions. J Gay Lesbian Psychother 5:29–57
Chiu LF (1998) Woman-To-Woman: promoting cervical screening among minority ethnic women in primary care, a participatory action research project (1995–1997). A research report. Rotherham: Department of Health Promotion, Rotherham Health Authority
Chiu LF (2003) Transformational potential of focus group practice in participatory action research. Action Res 1:165–183
Daniels H (2011) Analyzing trajectories of professional learning in changing workplaces. Cult Psychol 3:359–377
De Dreu C (2002) Team innovation and team effectiveness: the importance of minority dissent and reflexivity. Eur J Work Organ Psychol 3:285–298
Duveen G, Lloyd B (eds) (1990) Social representations and the development of knowledge. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Fruggeri L (2005) Diverse normalità. Psicologia sociale delle relazioni familiari. Carocci, Roma
Ganong LH, Coleman M (2004) Stepfamily relationships: development, dynamics and interventions. Plenum, New York
Gergen KJ (2009) Dialogue as collaborative action. Journal fur Psychologie, Retrieved: http://twoja-zaloga.pl/index.php/jfp/article/view/155/156
Gergen KJ, McNamee S, Barrett FJ (2001) Toward transformative dialogue. Int J Public Adm 24:679–707
Gergen MM, Gergen KJ, Barrett F (2004) Appreciative inquiry as dialogue: generative and transformative. In: Cooperrider DL, Avital M (eds) Constructive discourse and human organization. Advances in appreciative inquiry, vol 1. Emerald Group Publishing Limited, pp 3–27
Gilmore T, Krantz J, Ramirez R (1986) Action based modes of inquiry and the host-researcher relationship. Consultation 5:160–176
Hart E, Bond M (1995) Action research for health and social care: A guide to practice. Open University Press, Milton Keynes
Hill ME, Augustinus M (2001) Stereotype change and prejudice reduction: short and long-term evaluation of a cross-cultural awareness program. J Commun Appl Soc Psychol 11:243–262
Hoffman L (1990) Constructing realities: an art of lenses. Fam Process 29:1–12
Istat 2011 I cittadini non comunitari regolarmente soggiornanti. http://www.istat.it/it/archivio/67648. Accessed 21 July 2012
Jodelet D (1991) Madness and social representations. Harvester/Wheatsheaf, London
Kreppner K (2002) Retrospect and prospect in the psychological studies of families as a system. In: McHale J, Grolnick W (eds) Retrospect and prospect in the psychological study of families. Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah, pp 225–257
Krueger RA (1994) Focus groups: a practical guide for applied research. Sage, Thousand Oaks
Lingiardi V, Falanga S, D’Augelli A (2005) The evaluation of homophobia in an Italian sample: an exploratory study. Arch Sex Behav 34:81–94
Madriz E (2003) Focus group in feminist research. In: Denzin NK, Lincoln YS (eds) Collecting and interpreting qualitative materials, 2nd edn. Sage, London, pp 363–388
Mazzoni S (2002) Nuove costellazioni familiari. Giuffre, Milano
McNamee S (1992) Social construction and process of inquiry. AFTA Newslett 47:37–39
Moscovici S (1961) La psychanalyse, son image et son public. Presses Universitaires de France, Paris
Moscovici S, Doise W (1994) Conflict & consensus. A general theory of collective decisions. Sage, London
Pearce B (1994) Interpersonal communications. Making social worlds. Harper Collins, New York
Rapaport R (1989) Ideologies about family forms: towards diversity. In: Boh K, Bak M, Clason C, Pankratova M, Qvortrup J, Sgritta G, Waerness K (eds) Changing patterns of European family life. Routledge, London
Rosenblatt PC (1995) Metaphors of family systems theory. Guilford Press, New York
Schippers MC, Den Hartog DN, Koopman PL (2007) Reflexivity in teams: a measure and correlates. Appl Psychol 56:189–211
Seal DW, Bogart LM, Ehrhardt AA (1998) Small group dynamics: the utility of focus group discussions as a research method. Gr Dyn 4:253–266
Stringer ET (2007) Action research, 3rd edn. Sage, Thousand Oaks
Van Custem C (1998) La famille recompose. Editions Erès, Toulouse
Walsh F (2012) Normal family processes. Growing diversity and complexity. Guilford Press, New York
West M (2002) Sparkling fountains or stagnant ponds: an integrative model of creativity and innovation implementation in work groups. Appl Psychol 51:355–424
Wilkinson S (1998) Focus group in feminist research: power, interaction and the co-construction of meaning. Women’s Stud Int Forum 21:111–125
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Everri, M., Fruggeri, L. & Venturelli, E. The Power of Group Discussion: Enhancing Reflexivity in Professionals’ Practice When Dealing with Family Diversity. Syst Pract Action Res 28, 297–314 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11213-014-9332-1
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11213-014-9332-1