1. How Filipino
Movie Characters
Position
the Mentally ill
AQUINO, Mikka
CASTRO, Jiane
FIDER, Bea
Ma’am Cristina MONTIEL

2. INTRODUCTION

3. How the mentally-ill are seen
• child-like, violent, incompetent,
morally-weak
(Jocano, 1973;Perlin, 2008)
• across cultures
• strange, different
 the community has the tendency to
exclude the mentally-ill

4. EXCLUSION
• mentally-ill has
too close-contact
with community
• community feels
uncertainty
insecurity
• Limited from access to education,
housing

5. HOW do they achieve mentally ill’s
Exclusion?
• certain interactions, behaviors
• Ex. Patients with
Alzheimer’s Disease
excluded by own
husbands
(Moghaddam&Harre, 2010)

6.  Took over household tasks
 Chose patients’ clothes
 Fixed patient’s appearance
in public
 dictated what
activities she can
and cannotperform

7.  kept patient “outside” of
capable group
(community)
= EXCLUSION

8. The Role of Media
Media and Social Reality interrelate
 reciprocalrelationship

9. • Social reality is shaped by media
• Media confronts social reality
– Presents archetypes, traditional ideas
– Appears realistic, possible to viewers (Barthes,
1977; Macey, 2008)

10. • Not necessarily realistic (portrayal)
• Communication takes place
• viewers already have own set of beliefs
– compound with the ideas presented to them
(Anderson, 1977)

11. Mentally Ill in
Media
• 146 college students…later revealednegative
attitude toward the
mentally ill(Domino, 1983)
• Onscreen interactions preempt viewers
(Harper, 2005)
•Vicarious experience (Gerbner, et al., 2002)
•
Portrayed as burdensome, non productive,
social threats

12. Reality is produced through
social interaction and conversation
(Adoni, & Mane, 1984; Harre&Langenhove, 1999)

13. 
Social Interaction = DISCOURSE
 between community and mentally-ill
 Media contributes
 both interactive process and end
result
(O’Sullivan, Hartley, Saundres,
Montgomery & Fiske, 1994, p. 93)
• End result = Exclusionof mentally ill
•Interactive Process ?

14. Positioning Theory
•
study of the dynamicsof human interactions
•Not just talk itself - flowof talking

15. •
Each Utterance, Gesture, Behavior =
“speech act”
•
Attribute rights, duties, and
obligations (Harre&Langenhove,
1999)
•Positions = dynamic (VS role = static)

16. • can position others or be positioned by
others
• with certain rights and duties

17. Person A to Person B:
Good morning, how are you?
Person A positions…
 self with RIGHT to greet, ask a question
 Person B with the DUTY to respond
• Right - justifying certain for action as
following the rules or social norm
• Duty - a demand that one participant places
on another

18. Howdo the utterances and
gestures of Filipino movie
characters positionthe
mentally ill?

19. METHOD

21. Criteria

22. Criteria
• Different time frames
- Filipino movie classic
(Tinimbang Ka NgunitKulang, 1974)
- released in past 10 years
(Baliw, 2007; Kimmy Dora, 2009)

23. Criteria
•Availability> Realistic
Mainstream (Kimmy Dora)
- high box office revenues

Independent (Tinimbang Ka
NgunitKulang, Baliw)
- most awards

24. • Transcribed each film
• Social Episodes were picked
• Every scene where…
 Community and mentally ill interact
 Community members interact about
mentally ill
 Both words and acts
 Acts = “socially understood behaviors”
(Moghaddam, Harre, & Lee, 1993, p. 25)

25. • 3 Blind-coders (each Thesis group member)
– 1 blind coder per movie
• Text re-read 10 times
• Noted down in
Raw Data table
– Episode Number
– Characters
– Dialogue

26. Procedure
• Statements analyzed for rights and duties
attributed (Positions)
– Rights attributed to self
– Corresponding Duty attributed to other
participant
– Paired blind coder to reach consensus
about positions

27. Further Analysis
Analyzing
whole
episode,
“Parent”
Right and
Duty of
“Parent” or
General
Right and
Duty
Person who
had the first
utterance in
Episode
Participant
whose
Position
was
maintained
at the end of
the Episode
of Initiator
Initiator
Dominant
(Mentally Ill Right and
ORCommuni
Duty
ty)
Response
(Contested
OR
Not
Contested)
Outcome
Dominant
(Maintained Right and
OR
Duty
Repositioned
)

28. • 6 Main Patterns
• For each film, generalized rights and duties
both of the Initiator and after the Response
that fell under each Pattern
• Further generalized for one Parent Right and Duty
to represent all 3 films

29. • After re-analyzing, one additional
pattern due to one more Dominant Right
and Duty
 7 Main Patterns
can be further grouped into effects of
interaction:
•
•
Exclusion
Inclusion

30. • Tallied number of episodes (per film) pattern
applied to
• Totalled, divided by number of episodes
• Presented as Percentages for ALL social
episodes

31. RESULTS

32. Table 1

34. (32.68 %)
• INITIATOR: Community
Dominant Right and Duty:
(Community) The right to put the
mentally ill under surveillance
(Mentally ill) The duty to allow
self to be scrutinized
• Not contested
• Maintained

35. (17.05 %)
• INITIATOR: Mentally ill
Dominant Right and Duty:
(Mentally ill) The right to decide
for themselves
(Community) The duty to comply
• Contested
• Repositioned
Dominant Right and Duty:
(Community) The right to control the
mentally ill
(Mentally ill) The duty to obey

36. • The Community Excludes the Mentally Ill
by Controlling Them
– The mentally ill tend to be put under
surveillance.
– The mentally ill tend to be repositioned as
dependent on the community when the
community contests the rights of the
mentally ill.

37. • The Inclusion of the Mentally Ill Occurs If
They Have Support from Any Member of
the Community
– The mentally ill can only maintain their
positions when they initiated with
statement of goals or intentions and
with full support from any one member
of community.
– The mentally ill’s right will not be
contested if supported by a member of the
community.

38. • Two Exceptional Patterns
– The mentally ill can be positioned to
accept the community’s position as
voluntary providers.
– The mentally ill are positioned to let the
community aggressively involve
themselves toward them.

39. LEGEND:
10.78
Black– Exclusion
Gray– Inclusion
White– Outliers

40. Figure 1

43. DISCUSSION

44. Main Findings: Summary

45. 1.The community excludes the mentally ill
through control
2.The mentally ill assert inclusion by
expressing their intentions to
participate, and then gaining support
from the community
3.Two additional patterns

46. 3. 1. Community fosters dependency of
the Mentally Ill upon them through
provisions.
3. 2. The mentally ill do refuse the
aggressive advancements of the
community made towards them.

47. 1. Exclusion of the mentally ill through control
• SURVEILLANCE
• Very positions the mentally ill occupy
• Lack of contestation on the part of the
mentally ill

48. 2. The mentally ill’s assertion of Inclusion
• The mentally ill initiate the interactions
• State intentions (ex. responsible for…)
• Garner support from community
members (Protection)
• Conditional Inclusion

49. Contributions

50. 1). Methodological use of
Positioning Theory
• Possibility of the theory being used to
analyze films and movie discourse

51. Deinstitutionalized mentally ill
can also forge better, stronger relationships
within the community
2). Clinical Psychology

52. Practical Contribution of Our Study :
Movie industry
• To highlight the possibility of including the
mentally ill into the community in films
• For scriptwriters to focus on the relationships of
the mentally ill in the dialogue present in films

53. END
Thank you!