Global health pandemics (such as COVID-19) can result in rapid changes to sanctionable behaviour, impacting society and culture in a multitude of ways. This study examined how pandemic culture and accompanying moral order was produced within and through social interaction during the first and second waves of COVID-19 in Australia. The data consisted of a corpus of 29 video-recorded paediatric palliative care consultations and were analysed using conversation analysis. Analysis showed how adherence to pandemic rules became morally expected, and moral concerns about actual or potential violations to these rules became relevant in and through social interaction during this period. The COVID-19 pandemic provided a natural experiment for how accountable actions and a moral order are negotiated in and through our social interactions when our taken-for-granted ‘natural facts of life’ change in response to a global public health crisis.
Background: The importance of caring for children with complex and serious conditions means that paediatric palliative care must continue during pandemics. The recent pandemic of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) provides a natural experiment to study health communication during pandemic times. However, it is unknown how communication within consultations might change during pandemics. Aim: This study, a sub-study of a larger project, aimed to examine real-world instances of communication in paediatric palliative care consultations prior to and during the COVID-19 pandemic to understand how clinicians and families talk about the pandemic. Design: Paediatric palliative care consultations prior to, during, and immediately following the initial peak of COVID-19 cases in Australia were video recorded and analysed using Conversation Analysis methods. Setting/participants: Twenty-five paediatric palliative care consultations (including face-to-face outpatient, telehealth outpatient and inpatient consultations) were video recorded within a public children’s hospital in Australia. Participants included 14 health professionals, 15 child patients, 23 adult family members and 5 child siblings. Results: There was a pervasive relevance of both serious and non-serious talk about COVID-19 within the consultations recorded during the pandemic. Topics typical of a standard paediatric palliative care consultation often led to discussion of the pandemic. Clinicians (55%) and parents (45%) initiated talk about the pandemic. Conclusions: Clinicians should not be surprised by the pervasiveness of COVID-19 or other pandemic talk within standard paediatric palliative care consultations. This awareness will enable clinicians to flexibly address family needs and concerns about pandemic-related matters that may impact health and wellbeing.
Studies of conversational humor in intercultural settings have focused largely on illustrating how participants can successfully draw on humor to build rapport. However, it is nevertheless clear that attempts at humor can also go awry in settings in which participants come from different cultural backgrounds. In this paper, we focus on the responses of American and Australian participants to playful or light-hearted comments on, or responses to, another speaker’s just prior serious talk, which are designed to initiate a non-serious side sequence, or what we term “jocular quips”. Drawing from a comparative analysis of thirty recordings of initial interactions involving participants from ostensibly the same (AmAm; AusAus) and different (AmAus) backgrounds, we report our finding that affiliative responses to jocular quips are more prevalent in the “intracultural” dyads (AmAm, AusAus), while non-affiliative responses are more frequent in the “intercultural” dyads (AmAus). We suggest this is due to troubles in accomplishing particularistic co-membership and shared critical, mocking attitudes that are attributed to, or directed at that category. We conclude that Americans and Australians are not “divided by a common language” as such, but rather that affiliating with jocular quips in initial interactions is contingent on the locally situated accomplishment of particular membership categories and predicates associated with these categories.
This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.