Self-Confrontation Method

Self-Confrontation and Identity

The 1960s and 1970s witnessed a profusion of self-confrontation scenarios using video playback to confront different populations with themselves, with the aim of self-construal, confronting people with the reality of what they are and what they do. The video therefore represents a relatively powerful mirror in that it appears to state the existence of a reality in an objective and undeniable manner. This feedback takes on the value of truth; therefore, it provides a formidable driving force for change. For instance, self-confrontation has been used to treat certain pathologies, such as alcoholism, schizophrenia, and depression, or to improve self-awareness, self-esteem, self-image, openness, interpersonal [Page 848]relationships, work attitudes, affective sensitivity, and so forth. Not always theorized, these self-confrontations by video methods have been the subject of numerous studies and controversies concerning their effective impacts, intended or otherwise. The central question in these discussions is: Does video make a significant contribution to changing behavior in relation to oneself and/or in relation to other people? Although there is not one answer to this question, it is no longer of the most important concern for researchers. With the democratization of the video camera (i.e., its increasingly broad use by the public), there is no longer any fear of using video playback, but there also is less originality.

Self-Confrontation and Activity Analysis

The second, more recent approach consists of developing self-confrontation as a means of activity analysis. The primary aim is the construction of materials giving an understanding of the determining factors of an activity. Within this framework, self-confrontation is an attempt to improve on the collection of verbalized data. During an interview conducted subsequently in relation to the action, this means confronting a person, by means of a video, with his or her own behavior to help him or her express the factors underlying that behavior. In this approach we distinguish two paradigmatic foundations that lead to envisaging self-confrontation either as (1) stimulated recall of mental states determining action or (2) as a means for explication of embodied and tacit dimensions of practices.

...