DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-2397.2009.00672.
x
Int J Soc Welfare 2010: 19: 272280
Perspectives on narrative methods in
social work research ijsw_672
Larsson S, Sjblom Y. Perspectives on narrative methods in
social work research
Int J Soc Welfare 2010: 19: 272280 2009 The Author,
Journal compilation 2009 Blackwell Publishing Ltd and the
International Journal of Social Welfare.
The narrative turn has entered many different academic dis-
ciplines and is now also emerging in social work. This article
focuses on a discussion of the possibilities and limitations of
doing narrative research in social work, including a scrutiny of
definitions and of a number of theoretical and methodological
arguments often used by some of the leading narrative
researchers.
Introduction
Narrative research is a very promising approach for
gaining an in-depth understanding of peoples lives
(Josselson, 1995; Josselson & Lieblich, 1999; Lieblich,
Tuval-Mashiach & Zilber, 1998; Riessman & Quinney,
2005). However, when adopting a narrative strategy in
the field of social work, there are many methodological
questions and theoretical issues that need to be
addressed. The aim of this article is to present a pre-
liminary theoretical and methodological discussion of
how narrative methods may be used as a research strat-
egy in social work, where some of the possibilities and
limitations encountered will be explored with particular
focus on psychological and sociological approaches to
doing narrative research.
Methodology
In order to discuss how narrative methods can be used
in social work research and to examine the possibilities
and limitations of narrative perspectives in this field,
two major theoretical and methodological positions in
narrative research are critically examined from the
aspects of relevance and implications for narrative
research strategies in social work.
One of the positions studied is narrative methods
grounded in a psychology-based approach, including
humanistic and psychodynamic perspectives (see
Crossley, 2000; Josselson & Lieblich, 1995, 1999;
Lieblich & Josselson, 1994; Lieblich et al., 1998). The
other position represents a sociology-based approach
grounded in social constructivism and postmodernism
(Crossley, 2000; Riessman, 2002, 2003). Textbooks
Journal compilation 2009 Blackwell Publishing Ltd and the International Journal of Social Welfare.
272 Published by Blackwell Publishing, 9600 Garsington Road, Oxford OX4 2DQ, UK and 350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148, USA
I N T E R NAT I O NA L
J O U R NA L O F
SOCIAL WELFARE
ISSN 1369-6866
272..280
Sam Larsson, Yvonne Sjblom
Department of Social Work, Stockholm University
Key words: narrative inquiry, narrative methods, narrative
research in social work, psychology-based approach,
sociology-based approach
Sam Larsson, Department of Social Work, Stockholm
University, 106 91 Stockholm, Sweden
E-mail: sam.larsson@socarb.su.se
Accepted for publication April 25, 2009
and scientific articles written by psychology-based
narrative researchers such as Josselson and Lieblich
(1995, 1999; Lieblich and Josselson, 1994), as well
as by sociology-based narrative researchers such as
Riessman (2002, 2003) and Quinney (Riessman &
Quinney, 2005), have been studied.
The selection of narrative researchers was guided by
the purpose of finding authors who have published
extensively over a long period of time. Researchers in
the field of narrative psychology, such as Josselson and
Lieblich (1995, 1999; Lieblich & Josselson, 1994), who
edited six volumes on narrative methods in The Narra-
tive Study of Lives Series, represent one important
source of knowledge. Others are Atkinson and
Delamont (2006) who have edited four volumes on
the same topic, and the sociology-based researcher
Catherine Riessman who has contributed numerous
important articles on narrative methods over the years
(see e.g. Riessman, 1993, 2002, 2003; Riessman &
Quinney, 2005).
Narrative methods in social work research
Narrative methods can be used as a methodological tool
when carrying out investigation and evaluation in social
work practice (Martin, 1995, 1999; Payne, 2005;
Ruckdeschel, 1999; Shaw & Lishman, 1999). Narrative
methods can also be applied as a treatment method in
helping clients to consider a reconstruction of their life
story that may help them to cope with their life situation
in a better way. There are narrative psychotherapeutic
strategies based on psychodynamic, cognitive and con-
structivist approaches that may be suitable for social
work practice (see McLeod, 1997; Miller, 2006; Payne,
2009 The Author(s)
 Perspectives on narrative methods in social work research
2006; White & Epstone, 1990). However, in this article
the focus is on narrative methods in the area of social
work research, of which there are many examples
(Froggett & Chamberlayne, 2004; Poindexter, 2002;
Riessman & Quinney, 2005).
Social work practice and social work research are
often based on talk and social interaction with clients. A
central area in narrative research is human interaction,
which in turn is also the core of social work. An
important part of both narrative methods and social
work practice is the focus on clients stories and giving
voice to marginalised groups through listening to
their stories. Consequently, narrative methods can be
of great importance when conducting social work
research (Riessman & Quinney, 2005).
A narrative strategy in the research process may be
considered a type of case-centred strategy (see Elliott,
2005; Lieblich et al., 1998; Martin, 1995, 1999). For
example, narrative methods may be relevant when
trying to understand social workers interaction pro-
cesses with their clients and their talk about those
clients with other professionals. But it may also be
helpful when studying identities, life stories and
stories told by minority and excluded groups in
society (Halberstam, 2005; Riessman, 2002). Narra-
tive methods are particularly useful when trying to
gain an in-depth understanding of the individual
(Hollway, Lucey & Phoenix, 2007; Riessman &
Quinney, 2005).
Riessman and Quinney (2005) have reviewed how
the concept of narrative has entered social work over
the past 15 years with special emphasis on research
applications. They found that there were few studies of
good enough quality on narrative research in the field
of social work, in contrast to the volume of narrative
research in other academic fields such as nursing, edu-
cation and other practicing professions (Riessman &
Quinney, 2005). A trend reflected in their review is that
practice knowledge from narrative theory is more
developed than the application of narrative methods in
social work research. According to Riessman, social
work has embraced narrative concepts in research
applications to only a limited degree (Riessman, 2008;
Riessman & Quinney, 2005).
Riessman and Quinney (2005) give several tenta-
tive suggestions as to how we may understand these
findings. They consider different explanations. Narra-
tive inquiry is cross-disciplinary and based on
different epistemologies, theories and methods. The
research is time-consuming and the ethical questions
involved complicated. One conclusion from their
review seems to be that narrative research opens up
for creative collaborative research. However, narrative
methods represent a challenge in social work research
because of the great amount of theory, methodology
and epistemology involved that typically lies outside
2009 The Author(s)
Journal compilation 2009 Blackwell Publishing Ltd and the International Journal of Social Welfare
the usual professional canon (see Riessman &
Quinney, 2005).
Definitions and perspectives on social work and the
connection to narrative methods
In 2007, the International Federation of Social Workers
adopted the following definition of social work:
The social work profession promotes social change,
problem solving in human relationships and the
empowerment and liberation of people to enhance
well-being. Utilising theories of human behaviour
and social systems, social work intervenes at the
points where people interact with their environ-
ments. Principles of human rights and social justice
are fundamentals of social work (IFSW, 2000,
cited in Wilson, Ruch, Lymbery & Cooper, 2008:
49).
According to the influential researcher Elizabeth
Hutchison (2008), social work is multidimensional
and involves the complex analysis of the personal,
environmental and time dimensions of human behav-
iour. Hutchison points out the need to consider both
psychological and sociological perspectives in order to
analyse the multifaceted interaction between the per-
sonal and situational factors involved in the different
psychosocial problems found in the field of social
work. However, these dimensions are not to be seen
in terms of a causal relationship; instead, they are
embedded in each other and reveal many possible
analyses in social work practice and research
(Hutchison, 2008). According to Hutchison, all of us
are engaged in a process of constructing a personal
narrative that determines our understanding of our-
selves. However, Hutchison considers narrative theory
a relatively new approach in social work practice and
the meaning of narrative methods for social work is
not considered in any detail.
An important source in the field of social work is the
influential text by Malcolm Payne, Modern Social Work
Theory (2005). Payne also argues for a multidimen-
sional perspective when defining and analysing the
social work field, pointing out the need to consider both
psychological and sociological theories in the under-
standing of social work. He also argues for the impor-
tance of listening to histories and narratives from
people seeking help and that narratives are a focus for
understanding and changing peoples social identities,
roles and social constructions (p. 162). Treatment inter-
ventions may reconstruct narratives towards the change
construction of future social events (p. 173). Payne
points at important links between the understanding of
social work and the use of narrative methods. However,
the narrative principles for social work are discussed
273
Larsson & Sjblom
only to a limited extent and in general terms, and their
implications for doing research is not discussed at all
(Payne, 2005).
Definitions of narrative
The term narrative carries many meanings and is used
in a variety of ways by different disciplines, but often it
is synonymous with story. As in all stories, multiple
voices and identities come into play. Narrative accounts
give us access to the identity constructions of individu-
als and can be a good strategy for giving voice to
minority and/or discriminated groups (Elliott, 2005;
Halberstam, 2005; Josselson & Lieblich 1995;
Riessman, 2002, 2003). However, although Riessman
shared the goal of giving voice to unheard groups, she
recommended the researcher to be cautious, emphasis-
ing that we cannot give voice, but we do hear voices
that we record and interpret (Riessman, 2002: 220).
Important questions related to definitions of nar-
rative are: What is a narrative? What are its defining
features and which of its attributes explain its appeal
to social scientists? (Elliott, 2005). Narrative analysis
typically takes the perspective of the teller. When
telling a story, the teller takes the listener to past
times, recapitulating what happened then, and there is
always the making of a moral point in the telling of
the story. In comparison with a qualitative interview,
most of the talk is not narrative but question-and-
answer exchanges, arguments and other forms of dis-
courses (Riessman, 2002). If one defines the narrative
as a story with a beginning, middle and an end that
reveals an individuals experiences, then narratives
can take many forms (Manning & Cullum-Swan,
1994). In the literature of narrative research, there is
considerable variation in how different researchers
define the concept of the narrative. Riessman (2002)
pointed out that the definitions of narrative often
reflect the academic disciplinary background of the
researcher.
In social history and anthropology, the narrative is
often defined in terms of a life story approach. In the
sociolinguistic tradition, narrative research has often
been grounded in Labovs work (1982), where the nar-
rative concept refers to specific, discrete stories that are
organised around character, setting and plot. Another
approach, often used in psychology and sociology,
defines narratives as large sections of talk that are pro-
duced in interviews and include the interaction between
the teller and the interviewer. This kind of narrative
approach is often characterised by detailed transcripts
of interviews. The analysis of the structure of the talk in
its context takes into account the co-production of the
talk between the interviewer and the participant
(Riessman 2002, 2003; Riessman & Quinney, 2005).
Riessman (2002) gave an example of this approach
274 Journal compilation 2009 Blackwell Publishing Ltd and the International Journal of Social Welfare
from Eliot Mishlers work on identity development
among a group of artists or craftspeople (see Mishler,
2000). This approach is important for research in social
work because it often deals with long sections of
talk between social workers and clients or between
researchers and informants.
Yet despite these differences, there are some
common key features in how narratives are defined.
One is that they are looked upon as discourses with a
sequential order, i.e. they are chronological, meaningful
and social (Elliott, 2005). For some researchers, the
term histories is used as an umbrella to define life
stories, family stories, oral histories, biographies,
memories, narratives and the like (Martin, 1999).
Many researchers also agree that narrative stories
refer to discourses with a clear sequential order that
connect events in a meaningful way (Hinchman &
Hinchman, 1997: xvi) and that they also offer insights
about the world and/or peoples experiences of it
(Elliott, 2005: 3). According to Riessman (2002), nar-
ration is distinguished by ordering and sequence. This
means that one action is viewed as consequential for the
next. Narrators create plots from their experiences.
They structure their tales temporally and spatially. But
narratives can also be organised thematically and epi-
sodically. Narrators use particular linguistic devices to
communicate the meaning in their narrative construc-
tions to their listeners (Ben-Ari, 1995; Riessman,
2002).
Narrative methods and the understanding of the self
Telling a story is a way of telling someone else about
the self, but also about the tellers identity construc-
tions (Lieblich et al., 1998). Stories convey meanings
both about the teller and his or her identity, and about
the social context of which the teller is a part (Crossley,
2000; Wetherell & Maybin, 1996). A person telling a
story to a researcher is not only reporting on a set of
events in a simple way, but also imparting knowledge
about how the story evolved. The researcher and the
person participating in the research can be seen as
doing a narrative co-production, i.e. they are involved
in a dialogic exchange producing a story that evolves
through the interaction process (Riessman, 2002,
2003).
When eliciting stories about identity in interviews, it
is important to ask the right questions, which in turn
requires sound theoretical knowledge about the self
(Crossley, 2000; Hollway et al., 2007; Josselson &
Lieblich, 1999; Riessman, 2003). Narrative methods
can be seen as a special method of doing research on
identity constructions or identity switches in different
situations (see Josselson & Lieblich 1995, 1999;
Lieblich et al., 1998; Mishler, 1986; Riessman 2002,
2003).
2009 The Author(s)
 Perspectives on narrative methods in social work research
In the literature of narrative research, narrative
methods are often described as very good strategies to
provide access to different identities of individuals or
how they experience their inner self. According to
Lieblich et al. (1998: 7), personal narratives, in both
facets of content and form, are peoples identities.
Personal narratives are not only a way of telling
someone about ones life, they are the means by which
identities may be fashioned (Rosenwald & Ochberg,
1992: 1). The psychological research literature
describes how the self contains different voices
or sub-identities (see e.g. Rowan & Cooper, 1999).
According to several narrative researchers, the self is
dialogic and contains many voices and different
self-experiences (Crossley, 2000; Josselson, 1995;
Riessman, 2002, 2003).
One challenge for the narrative researcher when
trying to understand personal narratives and identities
is to get the whole story describing all the different
parts of the self (Josselson, 1995). According to
Mishler (1992: 37), researchers often focus on a part
identity rather than the individuals total identity.
Yet to begin with an analysis of part identities may
lead to the construction and understanding of the dif-
ferent sub-identities and dialogic voices, and also the
conflicts and contradictions that may exist between
them (Mishler, 1992). Mishler saw these different part
identities as unified by some kind of master identity
that connects the different sub-identities (Mishler,
1992: 37). According to Mishler (1986: 68), the most
important aspect of the narrative is that it helps in
understanding the quality of mind. In other words,
quality of mind, not plot, is the soul of the narrative
(Mishler, 1986: 81).
Theoretical and empirical dimensions of
narrative research
When carrying out narrative research, there are many
challenges that need to be faced, such as trying to
show more clearly how different kinds of narrative-
theoretical considerations are related to empirical data.
There is important literature that discusses both the
theoretical and the empirical levels in narrative
research (Atkinson & Delamont, 2006; Josselson &
Lieblich, 1995, 1999; Lieblich & Josselson, 1994; Lie-
blich et al., 1998; Scott & Lyman, 2006). However, the
relationship between the theoretical and the empirical
levels in narrative research needs to be discussed in
more detail, especially for the social work field.
Riessman and Quinney (2005) conclude in their critical
review of the use of narrative in social work research
that there are often methodological problems related to
a lack of direct quotations and narrative descriptions of
any length.
2009 The Author(s)
Journal compilation 2009 Blackwell Publishing Ltd and the International Journal of Social Welfare
Hollway et al. (2007), in considering the relationship
between theory and narrative methods, discuss a
special narrative method called Free Association Nar-
rative Interviewing and how it was informed by a par-
ticular theory of self. Because the theory assumed that
individuals are not aware of everything that makes up
their identity, this must be taken into account in the
production and analysis of concrete narrative data.
Crossley (2000) made a similar point when focusing on
the complex relationship between theoretical analysis
of the self and the use of different narrative methods for
the study of the self. In the present authors view, the
narrative researcher needs to make explicit the kinds of
assumptions of the self that guide the narrative meth-
odological strategies used.
Psychology-based approaches in narrative research
Josselson and Lieblich (1995, 1999; Lieblich & Jossel-
son, 1994) have edited a series of volumes on the nar-
rative study of lives that mainly consider psychological
perspectives and their impact on narrative methods. The
psychology-based approaches focus on understanding
the inner life and the self or identity constructions of
the teller, where both implicit and explicit processes of
communicating are of importance. There is not only the
matter of trying to extract as rich a phenomenological
narrative description from the narrator as possible, but
the researcher must also try to apprehend the more or
less submerged stories or what is not said in order to get
the whole story or a more complex understanding of the
history (Chase, 1995; Crossley, 2000; Josselson &
Lieblich, 1999; Lieblich et al., 1998). Theories of the
self that need to be considered as background to a
psychology-based approach to the narrative may be
inspired by a humanistic or by a psychodynamic
approach (see Crossley, 2000).
Sociological approaches and social constructivist
perspectives on the self
Crossley (2000) described the postmodernist approach
that sees individuals and the self as enfolded in lan-
guage and influenced by postmodernism. According to
Crossley (2000), the task of postmodernism is to
deconstruct linguistic structures and socio-historical
narratives. The postmodern approach is critical towards
the inwardness of individuals and this connects to
their declaration of the death of the subject, where
there is no essential nature of the self to describe
(Crossley, 2000: 2631). In the social constructivist
approach, the psyche, or our inner lives is consid-
ered to be found, not within ourselves, but in the rela-
tional spaces between ourselves and others, where the
self or identity is unstable and of fragmentary nature
with constantly shifting boundaries (Crossley, 2000).
275
Larsson & Sjblom
This approach is not interested in how a response from
a narrator may mirror the psychological or social reality
of events outside the interview context.
According to the sociology-based narrative re-
searcher Catherine Riessman (2002, 2003), narrative
analysis allows the researcher to make systematic
studies of personal experiences and to analyse how
important events have been constructed by the subject.
Narrators can position themselves in many different
ways, giving themselves, for example, active or passive
roles in their stories. The narrators create fluid seman-
tic spaces for themselves and narrators use particular
grammatical resources to construct who they are
(Riessman, 2002: 702). The individuals and how they
position themselves according to agency and their
imagination determine what gets included and
excluded in the story, how events are put together and
what they mean. Individuals piece together past events
and actions in their personal narratives to claim identi-
ties and construct their lives (Riessman, 2002).
Language and the narrative approach
According to Riessman (2002), we understand the
meaning of a narrative through language; and there are
three analytical functions of language that influence the
interpretation of the narrative. These are the ideational
function that expresses the content, the interpersonal
function, which is about the roles and relationships
between speakers, and the textual functions that reflect
the structure, i.e. how the parts of the text are connected
syntactically and semantically. Meaning is transferred
through these several different levels. What someone
says (ideational) is connected to how something is said
(textual) and to whom it is said (interpersonal). The
social context is also important in the process of under-
standing the meaning of the narrative (Riessman,
2002). Analysis in narrative studies opens up the dif-
ferent forms of telling about experiences. It is not
simply the content of the language that is important; we
must also consider how the language is structurally put
together. Narrative researchers must ask, Why was the
story told in that way? (Riessman, 2002: 219).
Classification of types of narrative approaches
Lieblich et al. (1998: 12) presented a model for the
classification and organisation of types of narrative
analysis. This model contains two main dimensions: (i)
the holistic versus the categorical approach; and (ii)
content versus form. In the Lieblich et al. model, the
first dimension is about the unit of the analysis, i.e. a
question of whether the analysis is to focus on specific
utterances or on the narrative as a whole. The categori-
cal approach may be appropriate when the researcher is
276 Journal compilation 2009 Blackwell Publishing Ltd and the International Journal of Social Welfare
interested in, for example, a phenomenon shared by a
group of individuals. The holistic analysis is more
appropriate when trying to understand the person as a
whole (Lieblich et al., 1998).
The second dimension, i.e. the difference between
the content and the form of a story, is a question of
whether the researcher should concentrate on the
explicit content of an account or on the structure of the
plot, the sequencing of events, its place in time and its
complexity (Lieblich et al., 1998). However, it may be a
good strategy to combine both these aspects of the
story. For example, in the analysis of dependency prob-
lems, it may be relevant to consider not only the content
of what the drug user experiences when on drugs, but
also the sequencing of events and the time periods
when the drug is used. These two dimensions can
be systematically combined in different approaches
(Lieblich et al., 1998). Crossley (2000) made similar
comments related to form and content.
The levels of analysing a narrative account
There are great challenges related to the analysis of
narrative accounts. The present authors agree with
Riessman (2002) that it is impossible for a researcher to
be neutral and objective and simply report on what
people relate. The researcher has no direct access to the
personal experiences that they are studying. We also
fully agree with Riessman (2002) that the research
process includes different levels of representation of the
primary experiences under study.
Experiences, first of all, are what is being attended to
and this can be done in many different ways. The first
level of representation is about the telling of a story and
how the personal narrative is performed, and in the
telling process there is a difference between the expe-
rience as it was lived and any communication made
about it. The next stage of representation is when the
spoken language is transformed into a script. Research-
ers in the narrative field must ask themselves how
detailed the transcription should be, what to include and
how to arrange the text, all of which have important
implications for how the text will be understood.
Another level of representation is about analysing the
narrative. Here there are more decisions to be made;
about form, ordering, style of presentation, what to
include and what to exclude. In the end, the analyst
creates a meta-story, editing and reshaping what was
told, and the reader of the text will further be making an
individual interpretation; thus every text is open to
several different constructions and interpretations (see
Riessman, 2002). Narrative research is about dealing
with different types of ambiguous representations of
talk, text, interaction and interpretation. This is impor-
tant to consider when doing narrative analysis in social
work research.
2009 The Author(s)
 Perspectives on narrative methods in social work research
Ethical issues
Ethical questions are of great importance when doing
narrative research. Within the narrative approach there
is great interest in detailed descriptions of the inner life
of the storyteller. When focusing on in-depth descrip-
tions of inner worlds, cognitions and emotions may be
evoked that may have been more or less submerged by
the teller, and this requires great sensitivity on the part
of the researcher. Elliott (2005) emphasises that if the
production of personal narratives is seen as a central
process by which people comprehend their lives and
establish some kind of understanding of their sense of
self, then the researchers interpretations of those nar-
ratives need to be presented very perceptively in order
not to undermine the tellers self or identity construc-
tions (see Elliott, 2005).
Narrative research in social work: some
evaluation criteria
The possibility of developing some standards for what
may be considered narrative inquiry that is good
enough is vital. Riessman and Quinney (2005: 397)
have discussed this issue and formulated some criteria
as to what may be viewed as a good enough narrative
strategy. To this end, according to Riessman and
Quinney (2005), the researcher needs to consider the
following questions:
Was the work empirical or based on systematic inter-
views or observations?
Did analysis attend at least to some working defini-
tions of narrative that focus on sequence and
consequence, i.e. were events selected, organised
and interpreted as meaningful for a particular
audience?
Were transcriptions made and carefully inspected?
Did analysis attend to contexts of production, i.e.
consideration of research relationships and macro
institutional contexts?
Did the researcher consider the epistemological,
theoretical and methodological issues involved and
were they critically examined rather than non-
acknowledged or taken for granted?
The narrative turn has been on the research agenda
in the social sciences for more than 30 years.
However, a question posed by Riessman and Quinney
(2005) is why there is so little research reflecting
these trends in social work, to which they suggest as
one possible answer that social work is inspired by
hard science, the experimental model and the
evidence-based outcome model. Another possible
answer may be that the narrative turn represents such
a great challenge to researchers. Narrative investiga-
tions are cross-disciplinary, drawing on many different
2009 The Author(s)
Journal compilation 2009 Blackwell Publishing Ltd and the International Journal of Social Welfare
epistemologies, methods and theories. The analysis is
often based on large amounts of detailed and compli-
cated data; it takes time and there are ethical chal-
lenges to meet (Crossley, 2000; Josselson & Lieblich,
1995, 1999; Lieblich et al., 1998; Riessman, 2002;
Riessman & Quinney, 2005).
Evaluation and validity in narrative research
There seems to be at least some agreement on the
validity issues in narrative research. Narrative research-
ers, whether they represent psychological or sociologi-
cal positions seem to agree that validity is established
by considering:
the rich data in narrative descriptions of the
teller
that interpretations need to be comprehensive and
coherent and grounded in empirical data
that interpretations need to be meaningful to partici-
pants and peers
that interpretations must be consistent with the data
that interpretations needs to be theoretically sophis-
ticated (Crossley, 2000; Lieblich et al., 1998;
Riessman, 1993, 2002, 2003).
Lieblich et al. (1998) gave numerous quotations in
reporting narrative studies and offer suggestions
for alternative explanations. The suggestion of
numerous quotations, or thick descriptions, of the
accounts is important because it is connected to the
question of validity. The validity, meaningfulness and
insights of qualitative inquiry have more to do with
the richness of information and the thick description
in the cases selected than with sample size (Patton,
1990).
There has been a discussion in the literature about
the difference between narrative and historical truth
(Spence, 1982). Spence pointed out that Freud regarded
himself as engaged in a search for historical truth,
looking for evidence of the actual events that now con-
stitute memories buried in the clients unconscious. In
a sense, Freud viewed the data offered by the client in
the manner of an archaeologist trying to uncover the
historical facts. Historical truth represents an account
of the way things were, based on an assumption that
what the client tells the therapist has a factual basis in
what really happened. Narrative truth, on the other
hand, tries to construct an account of events and emo-
tional reactions to those events that is coherent and
consistent (Spence, 1982).
Personal narratives do not reveal the past as it actu-
ally was. Instead, they give us the truth of experiences
that are neither open to proof nor self-evident, and can
only be understood through interpretation, by paying
careful attention to the context that shapes them
(Riessman, 2002).
277
Larsson & Sjblom
Unresolved critical issues
There are various dimensions of the possibilities and
limitations related to the narrative method that ought to
be critically discussed. Some of these issues are listed
below:
The large amount of complex data
The use of narrative methods can lead to unique and
rich data that may be difficult to obtain by other
methods (Lieblich et al., 1998). However, using a nar-
rative method and obtaining a large amount of thick
descriptions of storied data may also be a great chal-
lenge to the researcher because it may lead to difficul-
ties as to how to make sense of it all. On the other hand,
what kind of science operates better with less data
(Josselson, 1995)?
The challenge of accumulating narrative knowledge
Another problem is related to the question of how to
generate knowledge from several different narrative
studies using a narrative method. The challenge of
accumulating knowledge obtained through narrative
research has been discussed in the literature. Josselson
(2006) gives interesting comments on the question of
how to create some kind of meta-analysis of narrative
studies.
The use of narrative in qualitative and
quantitative research
One aspect of narrative research strategies is that nar-
rative methods are limited to qualitative in-depth
analysis of the stories told. The essence of using a
narrative strategy is that it provides a good approach
to an in-depth understanding of the actors point of
view of his or her identity or self-image and that it
encourages people to give voice to their often unheard
stories (Lieblich et al., 1998). However, there is an
ongoing discussion on how to open up the possibili-
ties of combining narrative data with quantitative
methods or the use of narrative in quantitative
analysis (Elliott, 2005).
A combination of quantitative and qualitative
methods sometimes provides deeper insights than are
possible by one strategy alone. By mixing the two
methods, it may be possible to reach a more integrated
description of the phenomenon in question (Boyle,
1994; Werner & Schoepfle, 1987). In her study of lone-
liness, the narrative researcher Hadas Wiseman (1995)
used a mixed approach including both quantitative,
qualitative in-depth analysis and narrative analysis a
kind of triangulation of methods (Janesick, 1994;
Patton, 1990).
278 Journal compilation 2009 Blackwell Publishing Ltd and the International Journal of Social Welfare
The problem of how to capture the hidden or
submerged stories
Narrative methods used in psychology-based ap-
proaches often consider the possibility of coming to
understand very complex life experiences and sub-
merged stories (Chase, 1995). Listening to the tellers
story and negotiating with the narrator about story
constructions may open up the possibility of revealing
hidden parts of the story (Atkinson & Delamont,
2006; Boyle, 1994; Chase, 1995; Scott & Lyman,
2006). The challenge is how to reveal these uncon-
scious stories with the use of a narrative strategy
(Crossley, 2000; Freeman, 2003).
The possibility of using combined positions
Some important discussions have emerged on how to
combine realistic psychological approaches with some
kind of postmodern constructivist approach. Crossley
(2000) tried to outline a middle position between
these positions. It may be possible to consider narra-
tors stories as a real manifestation of their psycho-
logical world beyond the boundaries of the interview
context and to see it as a manifestation of their psy-
chological and social worlds. However, narrators also
perform social and interactional tasks during the inter-
view situation. Crossley argued that the narratives can
be conceptualised as taking place inside the mind of
the teller and may be looked upon as a psychological
structure that evolves over time. The narrative inter-
view can elicit aspects of that structure during the
interview. Crossley presented a combined narrative
model where stories are analysed on different
levels representing a number of different voices or
various aspects of the self. In her model it is possible
to consider autobiographical constructions con-
nected to the ego or persona level, combined with
Freudian-influenced analyses of an unconscious
voice (Crossley, 2000, ch. 6).
Lieblich et al. (1998) presented a discussion on dif-
ferent levels of interpretation. They posed the question
of whether the researcher is merely a naive listener
focusing only on the phenomenological narrative
descriptions of the teller, or whether the aim is also to
investigate more or less implicit issues, looking for
gaps, silences and contradictions in the story. The ques-
tion they asked is whether one can take a middle course
between these ends and do both at the same time.
The present authors interpretation of Lieblich et al.
(1998) is that their work reveals a similar strategy as
that proposed by Crossley (2000), namely, that it is
possible to listen to a story on different levels, such as
both considering phenomenological descriptions and
performing critical analysis to uncover unconscious
parts of the story (Crossley, 2000; Josselson, 2004).
2009 The Author(s)
 Perspectives on narrative methods in social work research
This in turn opens up the need to combine psychologi-
cal and sociological theoretical perspectives as useful
lenses or interpretative frameworks when using narra-
tive research in social work (Hutchison, 2008; Payne,
2005).
Using narrative research in social work
There are many theoretical and methodological chal-
lenges to researchers that need to be met when applying
narrative approaches and discussing their meaning for
social work. Even if there are some texts that consider
the implications of histories in social work, there is a
need to develop further the narrative inquiry and what it
means for generating knowledge in the area of social
work research (Martin, 1999; Riessman & Quinney,
2005), including how narrative methods can be com-
bined with other forms of qualitative methods as well as
with quantitative analysis (see Elliott, 2005; Riessman,
2002).
This article has mainly discussed psychology- and
sociology-based positions and their implications for
carrying out narrative research in social work. Given
the fact that social work as an academic discipline is
built on multidimensional theoretical frameworks
(Hutchison, 2008; Payne, 2005), it is arguable that the
narrative approach fits very well into the social work
paradigm. Narrative methods are multidimensional and
try to capture a more complex understanding of human
existence, based on dimensions described from psycho-
logical and sociological perspectives.
There is still the question of whether the researcher
is merely a naive listener trying to capture the actors
story or point of view, or whether the investigator also
must take an observational point of view, looking for
contradictions, silences and the unsaid (Crossley, 2000;
Josselson & Lieblich, 1999; Lieblich et al., 1998), and
whether it is possible to take a middle course between
these ends (Lieblich et al., 1998). In order to get a more
detailed description of how to understand social work
issues and the clients situation, it may be important to
collect data in a way that allows the actor not only to
give a first-hand narrative description of her experi-
ences, but also to take a self-critical perspective on
stories earlier told. This reflexivity process is some-
times used by researchers as a way of getting more valid
narrative accounts from the actors, for example actors
may be encouraged to comment on their earlier narra-
tive descriptions (Marsh, Rosser & Harre, 1978).
In the view of the present authors, the future of
narrative research in social work is promising.
However, it is important to develop the narrative
methods that can be applied, including the theoretical
perspectives on how to understand self, mind and con-
sciousness which, in turn, may guide the narrative
researcher in social work when analysing the
2009 The Author(s)
Journal compilation 2009 Blackwell Publishing Ltd and the International Journal of Social Welfare
clients identity structures and psychosocial problems
(Larsson, Sjblom & Lilja, 2008; Riessman & Quinney,
2005).
References
Atkinson P, Delamont S, eds. (2006). Narrative Methods, Vol.
14. London, Sage.
Ben-Ari AT (1995). Its the telling that makes the difference. In:
Josselson R, Lieblich A, eds. Interpreting Experience. The
Narrative Study of Lives, Vol. 3, pp. 153173, London, Sage.
Boyle JS (1994). Styles of Ethnography. In: Morse JM, ed.
Critical Issues in Qualitative Research Methods. Thousand
Oaks, Sage.
Chase S (1995). Taking narrative seriously: Consequences for
method and theory in interview studies. In: Josselso R,
Lieblich A, eds. Interpreting Experience. The Narrative Study
of Lives, Vol. 3, pp. 126. London, Sage.
Crossley M (2000). Introducing Narrative Psychology.
Buckingham, Open University Press.
Elliott J (2005). Using Narrative in Social Research. London,
Sage.
Freeman M (2003). Identity and difference in narrative inquiry:
A commentary on the articles by Erica Burman, Michelle
Crossley, Ian Parker and Shelley Sclater. Narrative Inquiry
13(2): 331346.
Froggett L, Chamberlayne P (2004). Narratives for social enter-
prise. Qualitative Social Work 3(1): 6177.
Halberstam J (2005). In a Queer Time and Space. New York,
New York University Press.
Hinchman LP, Hinchman SK (1997). Introduction. In:
Hinchman LP, Hinchman SK, eds. Memory, Identity, Com-
munity: the Idea of Narrative in Human Sciences, pp. xiii
xxxii. New York, State University of New York.
Hollway W, Lucey H, Phoenix A, eds. (2007). Social Psychology
Matters. Maidenhead, Open University Press.
Hutchison E (2008). Dimensions of Human Behaviour. Person
and Environment. London, Sage.
Janesick V (1994). The dance of qualitative research design:
Metaphor, methodolatry, and meaning. In: Denzin NK,
Lincoln YS, eds. Handbook of Qualitative Research,
pp. 209219. Thousand Oaks, Sage.
Josselson R (1995). Imagining the real. Empathy, narrative and
the dialogic self. In: Josselson R, Lieblich A, eds. Interpret-
ing Experience. The Narrative Study of Lives, Vol. 3,
pp. 2744. London, Sage.
Josselson R (2004). The hermeneutics of faith and the herme-
neutics of suspicion. Narrative Inquiry 14(1): 128.
Josselson R (2006). Narrative research and the challenge of
accumulating knowledge. Narrative Inquiry 16(1): 310.
Josselson R, Lieblich A, eds. (1995). Interpreting Experience.
The Narrative Study of Lives, Vol. 3, pp. 2744. London,
Sage.
Josselson R, Lieblich A, eds. (1999). Making Meanings of Nar-
ratives. The Narrative Study of Lives, Vol. 6. London, Sage.
Labov N (1982). Speech actions and reactions in personal nar-
rative. In: Tanner D, ed. Analyzing Discourse, pp. 219247.
Washington, DC, Georgetown University Press.
Larsson S, Sjblom Y, Lilja J (2008). Narrativa Metoder i
Socialt Arbete [Narrative methods in social work]. Lund,
Studentlitteratur.
Lieblich A, Josselson R, eds. (1994). Exploring Identity and
Gender. The Narrative Study of Lives, Vol. 2. London, Sage.
Lieblich A, Tuval-Mashiach R, Zilber T (1998). Narrative
Research. London, Sage.
Manning PK, Cullum-Swan R (1994). Narrative, content, and
semiotic analyses. In: Denzin NK, Lincoln YS, eds. Hand-
book of Qualitative Research, pp. 463478. London, Sage.
279
Larsson & Sjblom
Marsh P, Rosser E, Harre R (1978). The Rules of Disorder.
London, Routledge and Kegan Paul.
Martin R (1995). Oral History: Research, Assessment and Inter-
vention. Thousand Oaks, Sage.
Martin R (1999). Histories in social work. In: Shaw I, Lishman
J, eds. Evaluation and Social Work Practice, pp. 133147.
London, Sage.
McLeod J (1997). Narrative and Psychotherapy. London, Sage.
Miller L (2006). Counselling Skills for Social Work. London,
Sage.
Mishler E (1986). Research Interviewing. Cambridge, MA,
Harvard University Press.
Mishler E (1992). Work, identity and narrative: An artist crafts-
mans story. In: Rosenwald G, Ochberg R, eds. Storied
Lives, pp. 2140. New Haven and London, Yale University
Press.
Mishler E (2000). Storylines: Craftartists Narratives of Identity.
Cambridge, MA, Harward University Press.
Patton MQ (1990). The Evaluation of Qualitative Research
Methods, second edn. London, Sage.
Payne M (2005). Modern Social Work Theory, third edn. New
York, Palgrave.
Payne M (2006). Narrative Therapy. London, Sage.
Poindexter CC (2002). Meaning from methods. Qualitative
Social Work 1(1): 5978.
Riessman CK (1993). Narrative Analysis. Qualitative Research
Methods, Vol. 30, London, Sage.
Riessman CK (2002). Analysis of personal narratives. In:
Gubrium Holstein J, eds. Handbook of Interview Research,
pp. 695710. London, Sage.
Riessman CK (2003). Performing identities in illness narrative:
Masculinity and multiple sclerosis. Qualitative Research
3(1): 533.
280 Journal compilation 2009 Blackwell Publishing Ltd and the International Journal of Social Welfare
Riessman CK (2008). Introduction. In: Larsson S, Sjblom Y,
Lilja J, eds. Narrativa Metoder i Socialt Arbete [Narrative
Methods in Social Work]. Lund, Studentlitteratur.
Riessman CK, Quinney L (2005). Narrative in social work: A
critical review. Qualitative Social Work 4(4): 383404.
Rosenwald G, Ochberg R, eds. (1992). Storied Lives. New
Haven and London, Yale University Press.
Rowan J, Cooper M, eds. (1999). The Plural Self. London, Sage.
Ruckdeschel R (1999). Qualitative clinical research and evalua-
tion. In: Shaw I, Lishman J, eds. Evaluation and Social Work
Practice, ch. 11. London, Sage.
Scott MB, Lyman SM (2006). Accounts. In: Atkinson P,
Delamont S, eds. Narrative Methods, pp. 167198. London,
Sage.
Shaw I, Lishman J, eds. (1999). Evaluation and Social Work
Practice. London, Sage.
Spence DD (1982). Narrative Truth and Historical Truth. New
York, Norton.
Werner O, Schoepfle GM (1987). Systematic Fieldwork: Foun-
dations of Ethnography and Interviewing, Vol. 1. Newbury
Park, CA, Sage.
Wetherell M, Maybin J (1996). The distributed self: A social
constructionist perspective. In: Stevens R, ed. Understanding
the Self. London, Sage.
White M, Epstone D (1990). Narrative Means of Therapeutic
Ends. New York, Norton.
Wilson K, Ruch G, Lymbery M, Cooper A (2008). Social Work.
Harlow, UK, Longman, Pearson.
Wiseman H (1995). The quest for connectedness: Loneliness as
a process in the narratives of lonely university students. In:
Josselson R, Lieblich L, eds. Interpreting Experience. The
Narrative Study of Lives, Vol. 3, pp. 116152. London,
Sage.
2009 The Author(s)