Date post: | 22-Dec-2015 |
Category: |
Documents |
Upload: | branden-bryan-atkinson |
View: | 218 times |
Download: | 0 times |
OVERVIEW
Cromby, J. & Willis, M.E.H. (in press) Nudging Into Subjectification: governmentality and psychometrics. Critical Social Policy
The Story
Context
Nudge and BIT
Positive Psychology
Character Psychometrics
Signature Strengths
Subjectification
Context
Neoliberal government policies – ‘austerity’
Punitive changes to benefits system
Media and ministerial attacks on claimants
During periods of economic downturn “worklessness is typically named as a problem of character” (Clarke & Newman 2012, p.311)
Nudge and BIT
Behavioural economics: Economics, neuroscience, psychology
Human decisions: neither simply rational nor simply irrational Choice architectures, imprinting
Libertarian paternalism People can legitimately be ‘nudged’ toward goals that have
prior public consent
Whitehead et al (2011) Policy implementations of behavioural economics frequently
associate emotional decisions with particular groups Behavioural economics “enables policy makers (and an
emerging cartel of psychocrats) to foreclose discussion of what the values associated with ‘good behaviour’ should be” (Whitehead et al., 2011 p.2834, italics in original).
Positive Psychology
Test based upon the Values in Action (VIA) ‘Inventory of Character Strengths and Virtues’ - the ‘scientific backbone’ of positive psychology
Becker & Marecek (2008) show that positive psychology: Endorses ‘the American Dream’
Takes a selective view of ‘positive’ institutions
Largely ignores power relations of e.g. SES, gender, ethnicity
Held (2008): the double epistemic standard of positive psychology
Positive psychology has influenced previous UK social policy: Lord Layard and IAPT
Measuring national wellbeing
Character Psychometrics
48 questions, 5 point Likert Scale:
Issues:
Reliablity and validity
Reactivity/response bias
Introspection
Quantification
Meaning
Character Psychometrics
VALIDITY
"They are using the non-validated version … we had tested it a while back and it failed”: VIA, The Guardian, May 6th
REACTIVITY AND RESPONSE BIAS
social desirability responding: the tendency of respondents to answer questions in a manner that (they imagine) will be viewed favourably by others
More likely in relation to topics such as sexual behaviour, drug use, abilities and personality (Rust and Golombok, 1999)
Character Psychometrics
INTROSPECTION the supposed ability to ‘look inside the self’ and objectively
report what we see behavioural economics presumes that we do not have this kind
of rational insight
QUANTIFICATION It has never been demonstrated that psychological attributes
are discrete and quantifiable in character In the natural sciences it is axiomatic that measurement
viability is demonstrated before measures are deployed Psychology sidesteps this requirement by using an ad hoc and
anomolous operational definition of measurement: “the assignment of numerals to objects or events according to rule” (Michell, 2000 p. 650)
Character Psychometrics
MEANING
5 point Likert scale: very much like/unlike me
Rosenbaum & Valsiner (2011): participants completed the NEO-PI, for each question wrote down the meanings of the end points of the scale
These meanings often varied: between questions, and between participants
“it is a misplaced assumption that participants have direct access to their response and that this response is static and can be represented as a mark along a line .. rating scale data, despite being statistically manipulated, should not (and indeed cannot) be thought of as objective” (Rosenbaum & Valsiner 2011, p.61).
Character Psychometrics
The VIA test:
may lack validity
is not a neutral ‘scientific’ process of quantification
does not provide objective assessments of character
“The contribution of psychometric modelling is fundamentally a political one, as it permits the assimilation of the reality of phenomena that are described in a qualitative way and can at best be partially ordered to an intuitively totally ordered reality, where the social utility rests on the need for comparison of human beings.” (Vautier et al., 2012 p. 818)
Signature Strengths
The focus on character and ‘signature strengths’
Ignores experience, skills, aptitude, knowledge
Emphasises psychological attributes of the self
How much can such an emphasis actually help people to find work?
How much help can actually be derived from these very brief, decontextualised, non-specific descriptions?
Subjectification
Foucault (2008), rather than govern by dictating rights and responsibilities, neoliberalism proceeds by: harnessing desires for independence and creativity to the
interests of business reconfiguring workers as entrepreneurs of their own skills and
abilities reconfiguring the social relations of capitalism to emphasise
competition, not between workers and capitalists, but between workers themselves
Neoliberalism therefore demands a new governmentality, a changed mode of subjectification: being subject to a power relation working to reflexively understand oneself as a particular kind of
subject
Subjectification
The VIA test as an instrument of subjectification: (coerced) personal responsibilities to: take the test
email results to benefits advisor
work on the self in light of the results:
“aim to use each of your strengths in a new way everyday for at least a week”
The VIA test as an instrument of subjectification: the nature of the test results
Subjectification Paragon Sociopath Neutral Like Me Unlike Me Random 1 Random 2 Random 3 Random 4 Random 5
Curiosity x x x x x x x x
Love of Learning x x x x x x x x
Critical Thinking x x x x x x x x
Social Intelligence x x x x x x x
Originality x x x x x
Carefulness x
Humour x
Kindness x
Fairness x x
Dedication x x
Honesty x x
Loving x
Perspective x x
Modesty x
Appreciation of Culture
x
Subjectification
Three profiles (paragon, neutral, very much unlike me) were identical
15 different ‘signature strengths’ were generated
6 of these appeared only once
4 more appeared only twice
Of the 5 strengths presented above:
3 of these appeared on 8 different profiles
another appeared on 7 profiles, the other on 5
Subjectification
Rationality:
asks questions, carefully evaluates every situation, does not jump to conclusions, considers only ‘solid evidence’
Flexibility:
enjoys exploration and discovery, takes opportunities to learn, adapts to the feelings and positions of others, able to change her or his mind
Innovation:
seeks out new ideas, can take up new positions, is ready to defy convention in order to develop new ways of working
Subjectification
‘Character Strengths and Virtues’ (2004) include:
BRAVERY: not shrinking from threat, challenge, difficulty, or pain; speaking up for what is right even if there is opposition; acting on convictions even if unpopular; includes physical bravery but is not limited to it
FAIRNESS: Treating all people the same according to notions of fairness and justice; not letting personal feelings bias decisions about others; giving everyone a fair chance
VIA Test ‘Fairness’: Treating all people fairly is one of your abiding principles. You
do not let your personal feelings bias your decisions about other people. You give everyone a chance
Conclusion
This procedure: nudges benefit claimants toward the adoption and rehearsal
of core aspects of neoliberal subjectivities responsibility, rationality, flexibility, innovativenss
inflects the discursive networks within which subjectivities are formed with a particular constellation of qualities
helps inculcate a collective self-image consonant with the demands of a precarious labour market
is probably unethical (informed consent, right to withdraw, confidentiality, anonymity, integrity)
trades in the allure of ‘science’, quantification and psychological expertise
illustrates the potential dangers of libertarian paternalism