The “ boomerang” effect of radicalism in Discursive Psychology: A critical overview of the controversy with the Social Representations Theory.

This article provides a critical overview of the controversy between the Radical approach to Discursive Psychology (RDP) and the Social Representations Theory (SRT). After having analyzed several positions, the first part of the article aims to show what is potentially complementary and contradictory in Discursive Psychology (DP) and the Social Representations Theory, when and why they are incompatible. In the second part of the article, we examine some of the main pillars of the RDP's antagonistic dispute and confutations and describe how the radicalism of the socio-constructionist thesis upheld by Radical Discourse Analysis can give rise to several hard-to-solve problems, which may then be translated into a boomerang effect: a) making relativism relative; b) reflecting on reflexivity; c) reducing the subject's role in a radical "contingentism" perspective; d) affirming the "totalising" and "reifying" role of discourse-action; e) assuming a "tautological" model of the binomium communication and representations, rejecting the concept and metaphor of communication. The paper concludes by arguing for a "dialogical" perspective not only in the terms peculiar to the SRT, but also for a "cross-fertilization" between the researchers inspired by the less radical approach to discursive psychology and those inspired by Social Representation Theory, highlighting the effect of the methodological implication that this would entail if researchers with various "school" memberships would instead of speaking and writing for their own academic circles would also learn to listen and read each other with respect. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]