A Conversation Analysis of the ‘Acquiescence’ of People with Learning Disabilities

Abstract

Contrary to received wisdom, 'acquiescence bias' in the responses of people with learning disabilities to questioning is not a simple phenomenon, and certainly not one to be laid at the door solely of people with learning disabilities themselves. Rather, it is probably an artefact of the conversational organization of interviews as tests. Analysis of Quality of Life assessment interviews show, we argue, that there is probably no uniform 'acquiescent' motivation which accounts for all inconsistencies and agreements that might be produced under such circumstances. Rather, the interview's logic produces a range of pseudo-acquiescent responses in the face of interviewers' reformulations, and their pursuit of plausible and acceptable answers. There is also evidence of 'anti-acquiescence', in which respondents resist pressure to change their answers. We conclude that the traditional notion of submissive, willing-to-please acquiescence is probably unsustainable on current evidence, and ought to be replaced by a more respectful account of the linguistic and interpersonal competence of people with learning disabilities.

Quality of Life for Adults with Learning Disabilities in Private Residential Care: Monitoring Aspects of Life Experiences Over Time

“…Regarding the interviews ituation, and the often reported finding of acquiescencei nt hose with Learning Disabilities, Rapleya nd Antaki( 1996) proposet he concept of 'acquiescence' in thisp opulationa sb oth conceptually cloudy and empiricallyu nproven. Rapley and Antaki( 1996) sayt hat inconsistency is often confounded with acquiescence.…”

“…Since, for many peoplew ithm ores evereL earning Disabilities,t he questions on QoLm easures will be answered on theirb ehalfb yc arerso ro ther proxy respondents, further issuesr egardingv alidity and reliability of findings aret he useo fp roxy respondents and response bias (Hensel,2 001).F urther issues include the expectations thei nterviewerb rings to the interview (Rapley & Antaki, 1996; Rapley &R idgway,1 998) and howt he interviewi so rientated and conducted.…”

Disability and Moral Responsibility

“…Rapley and Antaki (1996), for example, have demonstrated how 'acquiescence bias' among professionals and policy-makers who conduct interviews and questionnaires with people with intellectual disabilities, has often resulted from test situations that leave very little room for the client's agency and subjective voice. People with intellectual disabilities, as people in general, tend to be more competent and active with those people with whom they have a long-term, intimate relationship than they are with those whose interactions with them are more occasional and clinical.…”

The Normative North and the Stigmatized South

“…But where social psychologists seek primarily to eradicate the biasing effects of acquiescent answers, our own interest is in examining such responses in their own right as sociolinguistic data (see also Rapley and Antaki 1996). Our term for this pattern in the data, the political correctness effect, foregrounds what we see as the social, as opposed to the psychological, function of such responses.…”