Managing the Moral Implications of Advice in Informal Interaction

Shaw, Chloë; Hepburn, Alexa

doi:10.1080/08351813.2013.839095

Cited by 61 publications

(40 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Another important analytic dimension concerned the normativity 35,55 of the proposals: how prescriptive they were with respect to urging modification of patients' diets. Analysis was informed by conversation analytic research on deontics [56][57][58] and epistemics.…”

Section: Analytic Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Conversation Analysis of Veterinarians' Proposals for Long-Term Dietary Change in Companion Animal Practice in Ontario, Canada

MacMartin

Wheat

Coe

et al. 2018

Journal of Veterinary Medical Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Nutritional changes recommended by veterinarians to clients can have a major role in animal-patient health. Although there is literature on best practices that can inform veterinary communication training, little is known specifically about how veterinarians communicate their recommendations to clients in real-life interactions. This study used the qualitative research method of conversation analysis to investigate the form and content of veterinarian-initiated proposals for long-term dietary change in canine and feline patients to further inform veterinary communication training. We analyzed the characteristics and design of veterinarian-initiated proposals for long-term nutritional modification as well as the appointment phases during which they occurred, in a subsample of 42 videotaped segments drawn from 35 companion animal appointments in eastern Ontario, Canada. Analyses indicated that veterinarians initiated proposals at various points during the consultations rather than as a predictable part of treatment planning at the end. While some proposals were worded strongly (e.g., "She should be on…"), most proposals avoided the presumption that dietary change would inevitably occur. Such proposals described dietary items as options (e.g., "There are also special diets…") or used mitigating language (e.g., "you may want to try…"). These findings seem to reflect delicate veterinarian-client dynamics associated with dietary advice-giving in veterinary medicine that can impact adherence and limit shared decision-making. Our analyses offer guidance for communication training in veterinary education related to dietary treatment decision-making.

show abstract

Section: Analytic Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Conversation Analysis of Veterinarians' Proposals for Long-Term Dietary Change in Companion Animal Practice in Ontario, Canada

MacMartin

Wheat

Coe

et al. 2018

Journal of Veterinary Medical Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Correspondingly, conversation analytic work highlights behavior that appears to index recipients' "in-the-moment" dissatisfaction with either the content or presentation of advice. In addition to straightforward rejection (Pudlinski, 2002), recipients employ a range of resistance strategies, such as describing obstacles to carrying out the advised action, minimizing the importance of the action, claiming to have undertaken the action already, asserting their own knowledge and competence, identifying an agenda that is distinct from or contrary to the advisor's, invoking other authorities against the advised action, and admitting to an irrational basis for resisting the advice (Shaw & Hepburn, 2013;Vehviläinen, 2009;Waring, 2005Waring, , 2007a. The potential for advice recipients to become dissatisfied during advice interactions is also suggested by advisors' strategies to preempt and manage resistance.…”

Section: Explaining Dissatisfaction With Advicementioning

confidence: 99%

Paths of Resistance

MacGeorge

Guntzviller

Branch

et al. 2016

Journal of Language and Social Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Social scientists and conversation analysts have both focused on advice as a key form of support and influence, but neither have adequately connected patterns of verbal behavior in advice interactions to recipients' reduced satisfaction with advice. We address this concern with an interpretive discourse analysis of naturalistic "troubles talk" between college student friends. Transcripts (N = 48) were selected for analysis from a larger study of supportive interactions because the recipients in these interactions reported the advice as less satisfying on one or more dimensions, relative to the other advice recipients in the study. Our analysis explicates four trajectories of advice and resistance that characterize these interactions: sustained resistance, advisor persistence, irrational resistance, and contesting the problem. We discuss theoretical and pragmatic implications of these trajectories, including probable influences of the "friend" role on advising interactions, and the responsibility of both advisors and recipients for producing and preventing dissatisfaction with advice.

show abstract

“…Finally, the moral difficulties seen in the game were not special or distinct from everyday interaction. Concerns about avoiding being a complainer (Edwards ), giving altruistic and appropriately timed advice (Shaw and Hepburn ), and dealing with antagonism (Dersley and Wootton ) are phenomena that are documented outside the game context and work in the same way seen above. As Drew (1998) notes, morality is pervasively relevant in ordinary conversations, and as we have shown, there appears to be no magic circle so strong that it protects gameplayers from the accountability of moral concerns.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 95%

“…Jack and Matt continue advising Nancy in different directions (L22–L29), with Matt providing strategic rationales, and Jack pursuing his offer (L22). Nancy ultimately accepts Matt's advice, on the basis of confirming that Jack's offer is disingenuous (L27–L31) (see Shaw and Hepburn on being an advice recipient). Now comes an explicit attribution of manipulation, from Tim.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Manipulation in Board Game Interactions: Being a Sporting Player

Hofstetter

Robles

2018

Symbolic Interaction

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Deception and manipulation are expected in strategic gameplay, but how do players negotiate what counts as acceptable kinds of manipulation? We compare three examples from a corpus of 30 hours of competitive board game play, using conversation analysis to examine how players orient to the reasonableness of manipulations. We show that contingencies of timing of the attribution and receipt of the manipulation are as morally concerned as manipulation itself. Players organize their negotiations of acceptability around the concept of a “sporting” player or move. The “sporting” resource shows one situated members' method for collaboratively managing fairness and morality in play. A video abstract is available at https://youtu.be/IlaE-w6FUxw.

show abstract

Managing the Moral Implications of Advice in Informal Interaction

Cited by 61 publications

References 29 publications

Conversation Analysis of Veterinarians' Proposals for Long-Term Dietary Change in Companion Animal Practice in Ontario, Canada

Conversation Analysis of Veterinarians' Proposals for Long-Term Dietary Change in Companion Animal Practice in Ontario, Canada

Paths of Resistance

Manipulation in Board Game Interactions: Being a Sporting Player

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About