Most Downloaded Articles
- Lexical conflation and edible iconicity: Two sources of ambiguity in American vernacular health terminology by Stvan, Laurel Smith
- Negotiating frame ambiguity: A study of simulated encounters in medical education by Seale, Clive/ Butler, Christopher C/ Hutchby, Ian/ Kinnersley, Paul and Rollnick, Stephen
- Journalists and jabs: Media coverage of the MMR vaccine by Speers, Tammy and Lewis, Justin
- Professional-patient communication in the treatment of mental illness: A review by Hassan, Imren/ McCabe, Rosemarie and Priebe, Stefan
- Community as a key to healing after the death of a child by Hastings, Sally O/ Musambira, George W and Hoover, Judith D
‘Let the heart speak out’—Interviewing practices by psychiatrists from two different traditions
Citation Information: Communication & Medicine. Volume 2, Issue 2, Pages 177–188, ISSN (Print) 1612-1783, DOI: 10.1515/come.2005.2.2.177, October 2005
- Published Online:
In the present article, we investigate the extent to which professional theories that underlie, inform, and guide the interviewing practices of two psychiatrists (a neuropsychiatrist and a psychoanalyst) are discursively displayed in their ways of conducting a psychiatric interview. This study analyses excerpts from two audio-recorded psychiatric interviews held at the Institute of Psychiatry of the Federal University of Rio de Janeiro. It follows theoretical and methodological frameworks derived from interactional sociolinguistics. Ethnographic data and research interviews with both clinicians also ground our discussion. Using frame analysis as a central tool, we found that the psychiatrist who subscribes to a neuropsychiatric orientation displays a concern on assessing the patient’s cognitive processes, and shifts topics away from the patient’s delusions to (re)introduce the institutional frame of the psychiatric interview. By contrast, the psychiatrist who holds a psychoanalytic orientation towards interviewing not only listens attentively to very personal topics introduced by the patient, but also sustains and develops these topics. Most of all, she proposes and stays within conversational frames. In keeping a dual understanding about their practices in the interview situation, both doctors balance the need to follow the institutional agenda and the need to listen to the patient, despite their different theoretical orientations.
Here you can find all Crossref-listed publications in which this article is cited. If you would like to receive automatic email messages as soon as this article is cited in other publications, simply activate the “Citation Alert” on the top of this page.