Therapeutic positive autoethnography and developmental autoethnography – same but different? An autoethnographic approach

Purpose The aim of the present paper is to elaborate whether “developmental autoethnography” (DAE) is complementary to, similar to, different from or in fact the same as “therapeutic positive autoethnography” (ThePosAE). Design/methodology/approach This paper connects to a previous publication in which the author suggested a conceptual model for the novel approach “developmental autoethnography” to be complementary to “therapeutic positive autoethnography.” To confirm or reject this suggestion, the history of the two models was compared. Findings The conclusion was that DAE is different from ThePosAE. DAE has its roots in sensorimotor therapy and was regarded as process oriented, closer to a psychodynamic approach and belonging to the branch of humanistic psychology, while ThePosAE was considered to be closer to cognitive therapy. Research limitations/implications The present study was performed by a practitioner of DAE, so further investigations from a ThePosAE practitioner would be desirable. Practical implications Although DAE and ThePosAE were considered to be different, they could nevertheless be complementary when it comes to clients’ demands. Social implications Most probably, mental health issues will continue to be an issue both on a social and a personal level. Therefore, multiple therapeutic choices that are comprehensively described ought to be at hand. Originality/value Both DAE and ThePosAE are novel conceptual models, which have not been thoroughly compared until now. For future clients to decide which approach to use, this study could be helpful.