Getting to ‘no’

Q4 Medicine
E. Andersen, Gitte Rasmussen, C. E. Brouwer, J. Isaksen
{"title":"Getting to ‘no’","authors":"E. Andersen, Gitte Rasmussen, C. E. Brouwer, J. Isaksen","doi":"10.1558/cam.32459","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper aims to describe the interactional processes through which a medical professional and a patient collaboratively accomplish filling out answers to a questionnaire. Empirical analysis of three different sequences from a video-recorded doctor-patient interaction in which questions of a questionnaire were answered with a ‘no' reveals three different ways (or methods) in which doctor and patient accomplish this jointly. Applying ethnomethodological conversation analysis (EMCA) as our methodological framework, we conclude that the three interactional practices are fitted in relation to the constraints of the interview that is itself methodically aligned to the practices and organizational structures of the institution, a Danish hospital. Furthermore, we make the case that questionnaires are designed as idealizations of question-answer sequences, and as such do not operate at the same level of detail as the actual question-answer situation. Details that are crucial for the objective of the questionnaire (in this case providing information to a third party) may not be included in the recorded answer. Thus, we argue that in order to understand the informational value of recorded answers in questionnaires, we need to diagnose the interaction in which they were produced, i.e. to critically examine it.","PeriodicalId":39728,"journal":{"name":"Communication and Medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-11-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Communication and Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1558/cam.32459","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

This paper aims to describe the interactional processes through which a medical professional and a patient collaboratively accomplish filling out answers to a questionnaire. Empirical analysis of three different sequences from a video-recorded doctor-patient interaction in which questions of a questionnaire were answered with a ‘no' reveals three different ways (or methods) in which doctor and patient accomplish this jointly. Applying ethnomethodological conversation analysis (EMCA) as our methodological framework, we conclude that the three interactional practices are fitted in relation to the constraints of the interview that is itself methodically aligned to the practices and organizational structures of the institution, a Danish hospital. Furthermore, we make the case that questionnaires are designed as idealizations of question-answer sequences, and as such do not operate at the same level of detail as the actual question-answer situation. Details that are crucial for the objective of the questionnaire (in this case providing information to a third party) may not be included in the recorded answer. Thus, we argue that in order to understand the informational value of recorded answers in questionnaires, we need to diagnose the interaction in which they were produced, i.e. to critically examine it.
学会说“不”
本文旨在描述通过医疗专业人员和患者协作完成填写问卷答案的交互过程。通过对医患互动视频中三个不同序列的实证分析,揭示了医生和患者共同完成这一过程的三种不同方式(或方法)。应用民族方法学对话分析(EMCA)作为我们的方法学框架,我们得出结论,三种互动实践与访谈的约束相适应,访谈本身与丹麦医院的实践和组织结构有系统的联系。此外,我们认为问卷被设计为问题-答案序列的理想化,因此不能在与实际问题-答案情况相同的细节水平上运行。对于问卷目的至关重要的细节(在这种情况下,向第三方提供信息)可能不包括在记录的答案中。因此,我们认为,为了理解问卷中记录的答案的信息价值,我们需要诊断它们产生的相互作用,即批判性地检查它。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Communication and Medicine
Communication and Medicine Medicine-Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health
CiteScore
0.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
12
期刊介绍: Communication & Medicine continues to abide by the following distinctive aims: • To consolidate different traditions of discourse and communication research in its commitment to an understanding of psychosocial, cultural and ethical aspects of healthcare in contemporary societies. • To cover the different specialities within medicine and allied healthcare studies. • To underscore the significance of specific areas and themes by bringing out special issues from time to time. • To be fully committed to publishing evidence-based, data-driven original studies with practical application and relevance as key guiding principles.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信