Self-confrontation

Self-confrontation is a technique in which an individual is enabled to review an event in step-by-step detail and is guided through an exploration of the intentions and possible interpretations of their actions. 

It often makes use of video or audio recording but can involve observer verbatim notes and the use of techniques similar to cognitive interviewing to facilitate detailed recall.

The exploration of intentions is often given a structure through the use of a particular theoretical framework.

(See the section on 'Telling and Listening' in Winter, D. (2012). Narrative techniques in reflective practice. Journal of the National Institute for Career Education and Counselling, 28(1), 21–27. https://doi.org/10.20856/jnicec.2804)

Contextual action theory

Because it focuses on 'joint actions', this is particularly applied to reflecting on collaborative activities (e.g. career coaching).

• Each discrete action is examined and the participants are encouraged to elaborate on their in-the-moment intentions/goals for that action and how those micro-level goals were perceived as aligning with the meso-level goals of the various projects that the actions contributed to and the macro-level goals of the whole activity.

• The various participants can then explore their interpretation of the intentions behind the actions of their collaborative partners at various levels.

• The degree of alignment, disconnect and conflict between partners' intentions can then be explored to unpack potential explanations for what worked well and what went wrong.

Young, R. A., Valach, L., Dillabough, J.-A., Dover, C., & Matthes, G. (1994). Career research from an action perspective: the self-confrontation procedure. The Career Development Quarterly, 43(2), 185–196. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2161-0045.1994.tb00857.x

Winter, D. Non-stop action . Careers - in Theory blog, https://careersintheory.wordpress.com/2010/10/07/non-stop-action/

Valuation theory

This is usually applied when exploring an individual's communiated self narrative (e.g. when they talk about themselves to someone else). It involves:

• identifying discrete units of meaning (‘valuations’) in the account (chunking)

• identifying which of two overarching motives - self-enhancement (agency) or contact/union with others (communion) - was driving the inclusion of these valuations in the narrative

• identifying the emotional state associated with the valuation and its motive

• exploring the connection between valuations with the same emotional profile to identify over-arching themes

Hermans, H. J. M. (1999). Self-narrative as meaning construction: The dynamics of self-investigation. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 55(10), 1193–1211. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-4679(199910)55:10<1193::AID-JCLP3>3.0.CO;2-I

Hermans, H.J.M. and Hermans-Jansen, E. (1995) Self-narratives: the Construction of Meaning in Psychotherapy. New York: Guilford Press.

Dialogical self

Also focused on self-narratives, dialogical self theory assumes that an individual may have more than one set of motives driving their behaviours simultaneously. Sometimes these multiple internal motivations are aligned and sometimes they are in conflict. It is like a combination of valuation theory and contextual action theory but looking at the joint actions of various 'I-positions' within a single individual.

These I-positions represent the various internal and external perspectives that an individual may be conscious of in the construction of their self-narrative. They might be different roles the individual has taken on at various life stages or the internalised views of significant other people or groups.

Hermans, H. J., Kempen, H. J., & Van Loon, R. J. (1992). The dialogical self: Beyond individualism and rationalism. American Psychologist, 47(1), 23. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.47.1.23

Hermans, H. J. M. (2002). The dialogical self as a society of mind: Introduction. Theory & Psychology, 12(2), 147–160. https://doi.org/10.1177/0959354302122001

Hermans, H. J. M. (2003). The construction and reconstruction of a dialogical self. Journal of Constructivist Psychology, 16(2), 89–130. https://doi.org/10.1080/10720530390117902

Action identification theory

This also looks at the way individuals describe their behaviours and the extent to which those descriptions are high construal level (more abstract, focused on the 'why' of meaning) or low construal level (more concrete, focused on the 'how' of process). 

People tend to use lower level construal when describing unsuccessful actions and higher level construal for successful ones. 

People with more extensive experience in a particular domain tend to use higher level construal than novices.

The construal level that people use can be influenced by explicit instructions to be 'boastful'  (push to higher level) or 'modest' (push to lower level).

Vallacher, R. R., Wegner, D. M., & Frederick, J. (1987). The presentation of self through action identification. Social Cognition, 5(3), 301–322. https://doi.org/10.1521/soco.1987.5.3.301

Vallacher, R. R., & Wegner, D. M. (2012). Action identification theory. In P. A. M. Van Lange, E. T. Higgins, & A. W. Kruglanski (Eds.), Handbook of Theories of Social Psychology (Vol. 1, pp. 327–348). SAGE Publications ltd.