Difference between revisions of "Janusz2021a"
ElliottHoey (talk | contribs) (Created page with "{{BibEntry |BibType=ARTICLE |Author(s)=Bernadetta Janusz; Anssi Peräkylä |Title=Quality in conversation analysis and interpersonal process recall |Tag(s)=EMCA; Interpersonal...") |
AndreiKorbut (talk | contribs) m (AndreiKorbut moved page Janusz-Perakyla2020 to Janusz2021a without leaving a redirect) |
||
| (One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
|Author(s)=Bernadetta Janusz; Anssi Peräkylä | |Author(s)=Bernadetta Janusz; Anssi Peräkylä | ||
|Title=Quality in conversation analysis and interpersonal process recall | |Title=Quality in conversation analysis and interpersonal process recall | ||
| − | |Tag(s)=EMCA; Interpersonal process recall; Quality; Methodology; Couple therapy; Process research; Asymmetry of affiliation | + | |Tag(s)=EMCA; Interpersonal process recall; Quality; Methodology; Couple therapy; Process research; Asymmetry of affiliation |
| − | |Key= | + | |Key=Janusz2021a |
| − | |Year= | + | |Year=2021 |
|Language=English | |Language=English | ||
|Journal=Qualitative Research in Psychology | |Journal=Qualitative Research in Psychology | ||
| + | |Volume=18 | ||
| + | |Number=3 | ||
| + | |Pages=426–449 | ||
|URL=https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/14780887.2020.1780356 | |URL=https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/14780887.2020.1780356 | ||
| − | |DOI= | + | |DOI=10.1080/14780887.2020.1780356 |
|Abstract=The article demonstrates two parallel yet interlinked accounts on quality: in conversation analysis (CA) and in interpersonal process recall (IPR). We illustrate our argument with data coming from couple therapy. CA was used to examine asymmetry in the therapist’s affiliation with the two spouses, whilst IPR offered means to explore the therapist’s subjective experience and cognitive processes related to these events. By comparing and contrasting two approaches, the quality-related concerns in each of them are discussed. Furthermore, the analysis shows that using these two methods in parallel, in investigating the same data, can enhance the overall quality of research. | |Abstract=The article demonstrates two parallel yet interlinked accounts on quality: in conversation analysis (CA) and in interpersonal process recall (IPR). We illustrate our argument with data coming from couple therapy. CA was used to examine asymmetry in the therapist’s affiliation with the two spouses, whilst IPR offered means to explore the therapist’s subjective experience and cognitive processes related to these events. By comparing and contrasting two approaches, the quality-related concerns in each of them are discussed. Furthermore, the analysis shows that using these two methods in parallel, in investigating the same data, can enhance the overall quality of research. | ||
}} | }} | ||
Latest revision as of 09:32, 31 July 2021
| Janusz2021a | |
|---|---|
| BibType | ARTICLE |
| Key | Janusz2021a |
| Author(s) | Bernadetta Janusz, Anssi Peräkylä |
| Title | Quality in conversation analysis and interpersonal process recall |
| Editor(s) | |
| Tag(s) | EMCA, Interpersonal process recall, Quality, Methodology, Couple therapy, Process research, Asymmetry of affiliation |
| Publisher | |
| Year | 2021 |
| Language | English |
| City | |
| Month | |
| Journal | Qualitative Research in Psychology |
| Volume | 18 |
| Number | 3 |
| Pages | 426–449 |
| URL | Link |
| DOI | 10.1080/14780887.2020.1780356 |
| ISBN | |
| Organization | |
| Institution | |
| School | |
| Type | |
| Edition | |
| Series | |
| Howpublished | |
| Book title | |
| Chapter | |
Abstract
The article demonstrates two parallel yet interlinked accounts on quality: in conversation analysis (CA) and in interpersonal process recall (IPR). We illustrate our argument with data coming from couple therapy. CA was used to examine asymmetry in the therapist’s affiliation with the two spouses, whilst IPR offered means to explore the therapist’s subjective experience and cognitive processes related to these events. By comparing and contrasting two approaches, the quality-related concerns in each of them are discussed. Furthermore, the analysis shows that using these two methods in parallel, in investigating the same data, can enhance the overall quality of research.
Notes
