IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/rpsyxx/v10y2018i4p340-350.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Phenomenological and recovery models of the subjective experience of psychosis: discrepancies and implications for treatment

Author

Listed:
  • Jay A. Hamm
  • Bethany L. Leonhardt
  • Jeremy Ridenour
  • John T. Lysaker
  • Paul H. Lysaker

Abstract

Reductionist models of schizophrenia and psychosis have been criticized for neglecting first person experiences of these conditions. In response, at least two distinct bodies of research have emerged which study first person experience: philosophical phenomenology and approaches linked with the recovery movement. Phenomenological writings have produced a conceptual model of schizophrenia referred to as the ipseity disturbance model, whereas the recovery writings generalize from common and diverse experiences of movements toward well-being. Phenomenological writings focus on how lived experience in psychosis deviates from health whereas recovery writings concentrate on lived experience amid a return to health. These differences make it difficult to see how the two approaches might be integrated to inform treatment. To explore how these views diverge and potentially could converge we carefully examine major tenets in each body of literature and offer future roads which may provide opportunities for reconciliation among each perspective’s important contributions.

Suggested Citation

  • Jay A. Hamm & Bethany L. Leonhardt & Jeremy Ridenour & John T. Lysaker & Paul H. Lysaker, 2018. "Phenomenological and recovery models of the subjective experience of psychosis: discrepancies and implications for treatment," Psychosis, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(4), pages 340-350, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:rpsyxx:v:10:y:2018:i:4:p:340-350
    DOI: 10.1080/17522439.2018.1522540
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/17522439.2018.1522540
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/17522439.2018.1522540?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:rpsyxx:v:10:y:2018:i:4:p:340-350. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RPSY20 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.