Oldal 68 [68]
OCR
66 = USING INTERPRETATIVE PHENOMENOLOGICAL ANALYSIS Chadwick’s (2003, 2006) cognitive model integrates four fields of voice hearing experiences: giving meaning to the voice, connecting with the inner experience (acceptance of the voice), schema (acknowledgment of the positive aspects of the self) and the symbolic self (understanding of the self as dynamic and changing). The basic assumption of the personalisation model is that the relationship between the voice hearing person and the voice can be identified with the same rules as in an interpersonal relationship between two people (Paulik, 2012). The cognitive models, predominantly those developed by Chadwick and Birchwood (Birchwood & Chadwick, 1997; Chadwick & Birchwood, 1994), focus on explaining the reasons of the distress of voices and the ways in reducing this distress with the cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT). The interpersonal theory is more consistent with the HVM (Hayward et al., 2013). Qualitative findings have demonstrated interconnection between the relational theory, the HVM and the experience of recovery (Chin et al., 2009; Holt & Tickle, 2014; Jackson et al., 2011). The results of relationship therapy (Hayward et al., 2013) and recovery experiences (de Jager et al., 2015; Holt & Tickle, 2014) could all be explained with the help of the relational theory. Chin and colleagues’ (2009) interpretative phenomenological analysis (IPA) study explained the relationship between the T and the voices using elements of Birtchnell’s relating theory (Birtchnell, 1993, 1994): the personalisation of voices, the opposition or united relationship between the T and the voices, the proximity between the T and the voices. A grounded theory study (Jackson et al., 2011) revealed three explanatory factors of the positive relationship between the person and the voices: reduction of fear, recognition of positive feelings and the establishment of control. These factors were grounded in different processes: personalisation of voices, personal connection to the voices, strong self-sense (the sense of independence), connection to the community and a personal and meaningful narrative about voice hearing in the life story. Consequently, these experiences led to the recovery-centred approaches and to the functional concepts of self-help groups. Holt and Tickle (2014) emphasised the importance of the personal perspective and use of first-person singular in understanding voice hearing. The empty chair technique offers a therapeutic space where hearers can personalise the utterances of the voices and explore and seek to change the relationship with their predominant voice (Hayward, Overton, Dorey, & Denney, 2009). Woods (2013) offered a Geertzian thick description of voice hearers through her study concentrated on the social and symbolic meanings of voice hearing. Kapur et al. (2014) investigated the role of mental health and psychiatric institutions in voice hearers’ lives. They stated that hearers - in the initial phase of voice hearing - struggled with their providers. They anticipated receiving medical explanations for voice hearing but were met with confusion from these professionals (“What is voice hearing? Is it a disease?’). As a result, patients were primarily frustrated
