A produção sobre relações poliafetivas na psicologia brasileira: uma revisão sistemática sobre não monogamia de 2004 a 2021

• Autor(a) principal: Carvalho, Pedro Henrique Charão de
• Data de Publicação: 2021
• Tipo de documento: Trabalho de conclusão de curso
• Idioma: por
• Título da fonte: Biblioteca Digital de Teses e Dissertações da PUC_SP
• Texto Completo: https://repositorio.pucsp.br/jspui/handle/handle/26233
• topic: CNPQ::CIENCIAS HUMANAS::PSICOLOGIA; Psicologia; Não monogamia; Poliamor; Revisão sistemática; Psychology; Non monogamy; Polyamory; Systematic review

The present work seeks, through a systematic literature review, to map the Brazilian production in psychology about non-monogamy. The literature review was carried out in the main academic research databases in psychology, namely SciELO, PePSIC and the Portal Regional da BVS, which includes, among others, the LILACS platform. The research also extended it's search to academic theses and dissertations, mainly at PUC-SP and USP. Finally, a search was also carried out on Google Scholar, in order to further expand the results, covering almost all articles available on the internet, in Portuguese. After an initial survey, the articles found were read and screened again, with the application of inclusion and exclusion criteria, in order to separate only the articles that contributed to the research objective. This research sought to answer: 1) What is the national production in psychology on the topic of non-monogamy? 2) What is written about when the topic is addressed in academic research? 3) What are the main national references on the subject? 4) What academic content is available in Portuguese, about the Brazilian reality, on which future research can be based when dealing with the topic? The work also sought to make a brief critical analysis of the results and raise questions for the continuation of further research on the subject. The results showed that national production on this topic, in psychology, has been growing gradually, but it is still in a very incipient state. To make this statement, we consider the time interval in which the subject is being discussed in the country and the comparison with the volume of academic production in other areas of the human sciences, mainly Law and Anthropology