The grammaticalization of participant roles in the constitution 
of expert identity

Matoesian, Gregory

doi:10.1017/s0047404599004017

Cited by 101 publications

(34 citation statements)

References 17 publications

(12 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The impact of expert testimony in the courtroom is not comprehensively understood. However, the utilization of expert testimony has become both widespread and controversial (Matoesian, 1999). According to Schuller, Terry, and McKimmie (2001) the use of expert witnesses has not only increased in recent decades, but has become a necessary component of criminal and civil trials.…”

Section: The Need For Expert Testimonymentioning

confidence: 99%

When Cross‐Examination Offends: How Men and Women Assess Intrusive Questioning of Male and Female Expert Witnesses

Larson

Brodsky

2010

J Applied Social Pyschol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Personally intrusive questioning during cross‐examination has become commonplace. The differential impact of this questioning on female vs. male experts was the focus in this study, thus these questions are referred to as gender‐intrusive questions. The results demonstrated that the female expert was rated as less confident, trustworthy, likable, believable, and credible than the male expert. The male and female experts were both rated as more credible, trustworthy, and believable when subjected to gender‐intrusive questions. Furthermore, the use of these questions left the jurors with a negative impression of the prosecuting attorney and his case. Jury members were more likely to believe that the evidence exhibited the most support for the defense's case when the witness was subjected to gender‐intrusive questioning.

show abstract

Section: The Need For Expert Testimonymentioning

confidence: 99%

When Cross‐Examination Offends: How Men and Women Assess Intrusive Questioning of Male and Female Expert Witnesses

Larson

Brodsky

2010

J Applied Social Pyschol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…By shifting into a personal story-frame, speakers take on the footing of a protagonist "who belongs to the world that is spoken about, not the world in which the speaking occurs" and thus present what they did, wanted or thought in a different social capacity that they may no longer claim (Goffman, 1981, 147). Accordingly, shifts between explaining and storytelling are seen as indicative of the framing and reframing of the topics discussed (Matoesian, 1999).…”

Section: Our Findings My Method: Framing Science In Televised Intervmentioning

confidence: 99%

Our findings, my method: Framing science in televised interviews

Armon

Baram‐Tsabari

2016

Public Underst Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:The public communication of science and technology largely depends on its framing in the news media but scientists' role in this process has only been explored indirectly. This study focuses on storied accounts told by scientists when asked to present their research or provide expert advice in the course of a news interview. 150 items from a current affairs talk show broadcast in the Israeli media were explored through a methodology combining narrative and conversation analysis. Using the concept of framing as originally proposed by Goffman (1974) we show that researchers use personal accounts as a way of reframing news stories introduced by the program hosts. Elements of method and rationale, which are usually considered technical and are shunned in journalistic reports, emerged as a crucial element in the accounts that experts themselves provide. The implications for framing research and science communication training are discussed.http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/PSCIENCE The public communication of science and technology largely depends on its framing in the news media but scientists' role in this process has only been explored indirectly. This study focuses on storied accounts told by scientists when asked to present their research or provide expert advice in the course of a news interview. 150 items from a current affairs talk show broadcast in the Israeli media were explored through a methodology combining narrative and conversation analysis. Using the concept of framing as originally proposed by Goffman (1974) we show that researchers use personal accounts as a way of reframing news stories introduced by the program hosts. Elements of method and rationale, which are usually considered technical and are shunned in journalistic reports, emerged as a crucial element in the accounts that experts themselves provide. The implications for framing research and science communication training are discussed.

show abstract

“…Thus, it can be said that although ''expert witness'' seemed to be a label or a pre-defined category assigned to a witness who had expertise in a particular area in court, in fact it was not static (cf. [17]). 2 Instead, it involved intensive management of the communicative situation so as to present a desired self-image or identity (in this case, an expert identity).…”

Section: Socio-historical Context and The Rise Of Expert And Expert Wmentioning

confidence: 99%

In Pursuit of an Expert Identity: A Case Study of Experts in the Historical Courtroom

Chaemsaithong

2010

Int J Semiot Law

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There are certain areas of study where present-day semiotics of law can learn from history. This study examines the discursive history and historical courtroom discourse of expert witnesses in eighteenth-century American court. The aim of the study is to explore the use of linguistic strategies and resources in constructing an expert identity in relation to the factors which influence those choices. Instead of taking expertise as being lodged in the pre-given label, such as a doctor, this article argues that such an identity has to be constructed and negotiated, and reveals how such an identity is constructed and negotiated through trial talk during a hostile discursive environment. The historical courtroom is an interesting site in this regard, as it was the period when expert witnesses did not enjoy the same social status as their present-day peers, which came with the absence of discursive privileges as well. It is found that experts mainly relied on expansions of response as the resources to counterbalance skeptical attitudes and hostile attempts aimed to undermine their testimony that accompanied their vulnerable status and image and to gain discursive control during the interaction.

show abstract

The grammaticalization of participant roles in the constitution of expert identity

Cited by 101 publications

References 17 publications

When Cross‐Examination Offends: How Men and Women Assess Intrusive Questioning of Male and Female Expert Witnesses

When Cross‐Examination Offends: How Men and Women Assess Intrusive Questioning of Male and Female Expert Witnesses

Our findings, my method: Framing science in televised interviews

In Pursuit of an Expert Identity: A Case Study of Experts in the Historical Courtroom

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About