Editorial: Working with others’ experience
Simon Høffding, Katrin Heimann, Kristian Moltke Martiny
Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences December 19, 2022 DOI: 10.1007/s11097-022-09873-z (opens in new tab) via OpenAlex
Summary
AI-generated from the abstractThe paper surveys numerous methods that claim to work with subjective experience, such as IPA, DES, micro phenomenology, and neurophenomenology, and notes the difficulty in identifying their specificities and differences. It argues that when working empirically with others' experience through interviews, one engages in a '2nd person method,' and observes that all but one paper in the special issue describe such methods, which involve engaging someone else about his or her experience.
Study at a glance
| Characteristics | Theoretical or philosophical paper Peer reviewed |
|---|---|
| Topics | Philosophy of mind |
| Keywords | Phenomenology philosophy Cognitive psychology Cognitive science Psychoanalysis |
| Citations | 27 |
| Key finding | Argues that methods engaging someone else about his or her experience through interviews are '2nd person methods,' and that most papers in the special issue describe such methods. |
Abstract
“IPA”, “DES”, “micro phenomenology”, “phenomenological psychology”, “hermeneutic phenomenological method”, “neurophenomenology”, “reflective lifeworld research”, and “ethnographic phenomenological interviews” are just some examples of the many methods out there. While they all claim to work with subjective experience, it is not easy to identify their specificities and differences. When you work empirically with others’ experience through interviews, you are engaging in a 2nd person method. Besides for one, all papers in this special issue describe 2nd person methods, that is, methods that engage someone else about his or her experience.