Reviewing the epigenetics of schizophrenia

Background: Epigenetic research in mental health has grown exponentially during the last decade and holds what some claim are “revolutionary” potentials for the development of new interdisciplinary models of mental ill health. Schizophrenia is the most appropriate diagnosis against which to assess progress in this regard. Method: Papers on epigenetics and schizophrenia identified in a systematic literature search are subject to a conceptually-driven narrative review that assesses the relations between schizophrenia and epigenetics; considers some issues associated with empirical studies; and thereby identifies key assumptions guiding this research. Findings: The revolutionary potentials of epigenetics are thus far not being realised due to various influences, including a preponderance of hypotheses that begin from a primarily biological question; the “condensation” of environmental influences and their effective reduction to their molecular consequences; and a frequent reliance upon animal studies that effectively preclude some important influences already established as relevant to this diagnosis. Conclusion: Epigenetic research in schizophrenia (and mental health generally) could benefit from being more thoroughly interdisciplinary, from testing hypotheses that foreground social as well as biological influences, and from reconsidering its reliance upon psychiatric diagnoses

Methodological pluralism in qualitative research: Reflections on a meta-study

A short report is provided of a meta-study of methodological pluralism in qualitative research; that is, of the use of two or more qualitative methods to analyse the same data set. Ten eligible papers were identified and assessed. Their contents are described with respect to theory, methods and findings, and their possible implications discussed in relation to a series of wider debates in qualitative research more generally

Analytical Pluralism in Qualitative Research: A Meta-Study

Recent interest in analytical pluralism – the application of more than one qualitative analytical method to a single data set – has demonstrated its potential to produce multiple, complex and varied understandings of phenomena. However tensions remain regarding the commensurability of findings produced from diverse theoretical frameworks, the practical application of multiple methods of analysis and the capacity of pluralism to contribute to knowledge in psychology. This study addresses these issues, through a critical interpretation of existing qualitative studies that utilised analytical pluralism. Using a meta-study design, we examined the use of theory, application of methods and production of findings in studies that had adopted qualitative analytical pluralism. Following comprehensive database searches, 10 articles were included in the analysis. Epistemological and ontological considerations, the influence of decisions made in the practical application of pluralism and approaches to interpreting findings produced from multiple analyses are discussed, and implications for future research are considered

Social epigenetics: a science of social science?

Epigenetics has considerable potential to transform social science by embedding mutually regulative reciprocal connections between biological and social processes within the human activities it studies. This paper highlights common epigenetic methods and outlines practical considerations in the design of ‘social epigenetics’ research addressing the identification of biomolecular pathways, statistical inference of causality, conceptualization of the environment as a biochemical event, heritability of epigenetic alterations and intergenerational accountability, and concept of time implied by attempts to capture complex, non‐linear gene‐environment interactions. Finally, we reflect on the social epigenome as a conceptual space and try to identify barriers to translation, and practical and ethical issues raised by epigenetics research. In order for social epigenetics and social science to contribute to the emergence of this putative ‘science of social science’ and to capture meaningful human experience they will both need to change significantly

Fundamental questions for psychology

This paper argues that the mainstream of psychology is misconceived in ways which make it largely unsuitable as a basis for clinical interventions. Why do we need a new way of thinking about work with distressed individuals? What is wrong with the many different styles of therapy and intervention already in use

Affective normativity and the status quo

Affective normativity and the status qu

Reconstructing the person

This paper proposes that feelings, rather than cognitions or behaviours, are the core stuff of human experience and should provide the starting point for clinical understandings. So far in this special issue, we’ve suggested in various ways that cognition and it’s alternatives, narrative and discourse, are not primary in human experience. But what is

Pebbles in palms: Counter‐practices against despair

© 2019 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. This is the accepted manuscript version of an article which has been published in final form at https://doi.org/10.1002/ppi.1481With ongoing news of hardship and suffering in the United Kingdom and throughout the world, and in the context of austerity, shrinking public services and increasing social inequalities, it is sometimes difficult not to fall into despair, to feel hopeless or ineffectual. In this paper we consider counter‐practices to such despair and hopelessness that we hope will be helpful to all clinicians.Peer reviewe

Depression: embodying social inequality

A critical realist social constructionist account of depression that attempts to thoroughly take account of embodiment, materiality and power by drawing on various resources, including neuroscience