1. THE PSYCHO-ONCOLOGY: THE GENERATOR POWER OF NARRATIONS IN THE SICK IDENTITY CONSTRUCTION Erica Bagni, Eleonora Braga, Gian Piero Turchi University of Padova, General Psychology Department – ITALY E-mail: labsalute.psicologia@unipd.it NARRATIVISTIC PARADIGM REALITY IS A DISCURSIVE CONFIGURATION ALWAYS IN TRANSORMATION IT IS GENERATED BY PEOPLE KNOWLEDGE WAYS HEALTH IS A DIALOGICAL PROCESS THEORY OF DIALOGICAL IDENTITY (Turchi et al. 2007) TO DESCRIBE DISCURSIVE WAYS USED ‘TO TALK ABOUT’ ‘ONCOLOGICAL SICKNESS’ BY DIFFERENT PEOPLE THAT CONTRIBUTES TO CONSTRUCT IT AIM CONCLUSIVE CONSIDERATIONS - The discursive productions of people who were/are oncologic patient present discursive elements that inscribe ‘sickness” as possible ‘event’ of biographic path (dialogical self) and so not as central event that construct the whole identity - More than the other, the ‘common sense’ describes people who are affected by tumour only through knowledge way of “sickness”. In general, the ‘sickness theories’ are used, more by the ‘common sense’: in this way, the whole “biographic career” turns around the biographic event of pathology. The sick person builts its “dialogical self” in a “less pathologic” way than other people do about it ANALYSIS RESULTS (The follow tables show the comparison among repertories founded in the questions analysis that generate the same reality configuration) SICK PEOPLE  it is the unique group that individuates a change perspectives and projects future narrative possibilities. HEALED PEOPLE  the members of this group describe themselves in reference to “what they do” today, comparing this with the past. They assumes a position that imply the break of “sick” narrative coherence. COMMON SENSE  the person afflicted by a tumour is described only like a sick person HEALTH SUBSUMES SANITY Sanity as one of the narrative possibilities of health THE RESEARCH SAMPLE 47 people actually affected by a tumour (“SICK” SAMPLE) 20 people affected in the past by a tumour (“HEALED” SAMPLE) 30 healthy people, never affected by a tumuor (“COMMON SENSE” SAMPLE) SURVEY TOOL OPENED QUESTIONS QUESTIONNAIRE QUESTIONNAIRE TEXTUAL ANALYSIS M.A.D.I.T. METHODOLOGY (Turchi et al. 2007) DISCURSIVE DISCURSIVE REPERTORIES “How do I describe myself ‘today’ after my sickness diagnosis?” (“sick” sample and “healed” sample) “How do you think a person describes itself after a tumour diagnosis?” (“common sense” sample) SICK PEOPLEHEALED PEOPLECOMMON SENSE PEOPLE Comparison repertory Change repertory Sickness repertory Reality sanction repertory Relativization repertory Future projection repertory Action repertory Generalization repertory Problem attribution repertory Explanation repertory Consequences repertory “How did I describe myself in the past, before my sickness diagnosis?” (“sick” and “healed” samples) “How do you think a person described itself before to know its tumour diagnosis?” (“common sense” sample) SICK SAMPLEHEALED SAMPLECOMMON SENSE SAMPLE Action repertory Tautology repertory Future projection repertory Sickness repertory “How will I describe myself ‘tomorrow’?” (“sick” sample and “healed” sample) “How do you think a person affected by tumour describes itself in a future life perspective?” (“common sense” sample) SICK SAMPLEHEALED SAMPLECOMMON SENSE SAMPLE Relativization repertory Anticipation repertory Future projection repertory Action repertory Reality sanction repertory Problem attribution repertory SICK PEOPLE  doesn’t use descriptions about pathology, but description about a reality configuration in pragmatic sense. HEALED PEOPLE  it describes itself in reference to the future. COMMON SENSE  it is the unique group that uses the sickness repertory as a central element of identity  “typization process” ALL THREE SAMPLES  they use discursive modalities that refer to a projection toward future scenarios COMMON SENSE  is the only group who uses discursive configurations that keep a narrative coherence of “problem”, so it remains a static reality  typization process HEALTH PROMOTION INTERVENTIONS HAVE TO PROMOTE A TRANFORMATIVE PROCESS THAT INVOLVES ALL ROLES OF THE DISCURSIVE CONTEXT OF REALITY. AIM OF HEALTH PROMOTION INTERVENTION: TO RECONSIDER THE PATHOLOGY INSURGANCE AS ‘POSSIBLE BIOGRAPHIC EVENT’ Bibliography - Federspil, G., “Il concetto di malattia”, Medicina - Rivista E.M.I., 7, 1987 - Turchi G.P., “M.A.D.I.T. – manuale per la metodologia di analisi dei dati informatizzati testuali”, Armando Editore, Roma, 2007 - Turchi G.P., Della Torre C., “Psicologia della Salute – dal modello bio-psico-sociale al modello dialogico”, Armando Editore, Roma, 2007 THEORETICAL FRAME CONNECTED TO THIS PAPER YOU CAN FIND: in the section “HEALTH PSYCHOLOGY” - Health in the territory as a shared responsability, paper and slides files - HIV: a reality generated by the “dialogical meeting” between self-descrption and self-narrations: an example of health promotion intervention and its efficacy evaluation, poster files in the section “DIALOGICAL MODEL” - Epistemological foundation and methodological exactness regarding research in the discursive science, symposium and slides files