Blustein, D. L., Grzanka, P. R., et al. (2024).
American Psychologist.
Abstract
This article presents the rationale and a new critical framework for precarity, which reflects a psychosocial concept that links structural inequities with experiences of alienation, anomie, and uncertainty. Emerging from multiple disciplines, including anthropology, cultural studies, sociology, political science, and psychology, the concept of precarity provides a conceptual scaffolding for understanding the complex causes of precarious life circumstances while also seeking to identify how people react, adapt, and resist the forces that evoke such tenuous psychosocial experiences.Wepresent a critical conceptual framework as a nonlinear heuristic that serves to identify and organize relevant elements of precarity in a presumably infinite number of contexts and applications. The framework identifies socio-political-economic contexts, material conditions, and psychological experiences as key elements of precarity. Another essential aspect of this framework is the delineation of interrelated and nonlinear responses to precarity, which include resistance, adaptation, and resignation. We then summarize selected implications of precarity for psychological interventions, vocational and organizational psychology, and explorations and advocacy about race, gender, and other systems of inequality. Future research directions, including optimal methodologies to study precarity, conclude the article.
Public Significance Statement
In this study, we introduce the concept of precarity, which links feelings of alienation, instability, insecurity, and existential threat with structural inequities. The complex ways that precarity influences and constrains people are described in a framework that includes a discussion about how people react, adapt, and resist the causes of precarity. Implications for psychological practice, research, and social/racial justice conclude the article.
Here are some thoughts:
This article is important for practicing psychologists and other mental health professionals because it offers a critical framework for understanding precarity, which can help them move beyond individualistic interpretations of suffering and incorporate structural factors into their practice. The article argues that psychology has historically advanced neoliberal ideology by focusing on the self and mental health as solutions to social and economic problems, potentially pathologizing individuals experiencing precarity.
By adopting a psychology of precarity, professionals can better conceptualize and critique the psychosocial costs of widespread instability. This framework emphasizes the dynamic nature of precarity, its various antecedents and outcomes, and individual and collective responses to it, such as resistance, adaptation, or resignation. It highlights how socio-political-economic contexts, like the retreat of the social welfare state and hyper-individualism, contribute to precarity and its effects, which are often deeply complementary to other forms of oppression such as anti-Blackness, colonialism, and misogyny.
The article suggests that this framework can infuse structural thought into conceptualizations and interventions for people struggling with various life aspects, fostering critical consciousness about systemic inequities. For instance, it can help understand psychological costs like anxiety, existential threat, and chronic stress as responses to chronic uncertainty rather than solely individual psychopathology.
