Difference between revisions of "Smart-etal2019"

From emcawiki
Jump to: navigation, search
(Created page with "{{BibEntry |BibType=INCOLLECTION |Author(s)=Cordet Smart; Holly Reed; Madeleine Tremblett; Nancy Froomberg |Title=Using Joint Conversation Analysis Between Clinicians and Rese...")
 
 
Line 2: Line 2:
 
|BibType=INCOLLECTION
 
|BibType=INCOLLECTION
 
|Author(s)=Cordet Smart; Holly Reed; Madeleine Tremblett; Nancy Froomberg
 
|Author(s)=Cordet Smart; Holly Reed; Madeleine Tremblett; Nancy Froomberg
|Title=Using Joint Conversation Analysis Between Clinicians and Researchers: Developing Reflexivity in Community Mental Health Teams
+
|Title=Using joint conversation analysis between clinicians and researchers: developing reflexivity in community mental health teams
|Editor(s)=C. Smart; T. Auburn;
+
|Editor(s)=Cordet Smart; Timothy Auburn;
 
|Tag(s)=EMCA; Reflexivity; Methodology
 
|Tag(s)=EMCA; Reflexivity; Methodology
 
|Key=Smart-etal2019
 
|Key=Smart-etal2019
 +
|Publisher=Palgrave Macmillan
 
|Year=2019
 
|Year=2019
 
|Language=English
 
|Language=English
|Booktitle=Interprofessional Care and Mental Health. The Language of Mental Health
+
|Address=Cham
|Pages=295-317
+
|Booktitle=Interprofessional Care and Mental Health: The Language of Mental Health
 +
|Pages=295–317
 
|URL=https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-319-98228-1_14
 
|URL=https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-319-98228-1_14
|DOI=https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-98228-1_14
+
|DOI=10.1007/978-3-319-98228-1_14
 
|Abstract=Analysing data in groups is highly beneficial in ensuring the credibility and accuracy of analysis. This chapter detailed how we developed joint Conversation Analysis (CA) groups run with clinicians and researchers. We outline how data groups work when using CA as the main framework for analysis, to ensure the credibility of the analysis. Limited research reports the use of joint analysis groups with participants, service users or clinicians. We review the challenges this approach creates and discuss how we were able to achieve this, and how it added to the research in enhancing confidence in the accuracy of transcriptions, and through ensuring the relevance of the analysis. We provide a protocol to guide how future joint analysis groups could be run.
 
|Abstract=Analysing data in groups is highly beneficial in ensuring the credibility and accuracy of analysis. This chapter detailed how we developed joint Conversation Analysis (CA) groups run with clinicians and researchers. We outline how data groups work when using CA as the main framework for analysis, to ensure the credibility of the analysis. Limited research reports the use of joint analysis groups with participants, service users or clinicians. We review the challenges this approach creates and discuss how we were able to achieve this, and how it added to the research in enhancing confidence in the accuracy of transcriptions, and through ensuring the relevance of the analysis. We provide a protocol to guide how future joint analysis groups could be run.
 
}}
 
}}

Latest revision as of 08:35, 16 January 2020

Smart-etal2019
BibType INCOLLECTION
Key Smart-etal2019
Author(s) Cordet Smart, Holly Reed, Madeleine Tremblett, Nancy Froomberg
Title Using joint conversation analysis between clinicians and researchers: developing reflexivity in community mental health teams
Editor(s) Cordet Smart, Timothy Auburn
Tag(s) EMCA, Reflexivity, Methodology
Publisher Palgrave Macmillan
Year 2019
Language English
City Cham
Month
Journal
Volume
Number
Pages 295–317
URL Link
DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-98228-1_14
ISBN
Organization
Institution
School
Type
Edition
Series
Howpublished
Book title Interprofessional Care and Mental Health: The Language of Mental Health
Chapter

Download BibTex

Abstract

Analysing data in groups is highly beneficial in ensuring the credibility and accuracy of analysis. This chapter detailed how we developed joint Conversation Analysis (CA) groups run with clinicians and researchers. We outline how data groups work when using CA as the main framework for analysis, to ensure the credibility of the analysis. Limited research reports the use of joint analysis groups with participants, service users or clinicians. We review the challenges this approach creates and discuss how we were able to achieve this, and how it added to the research in enhancing confidence in the accuracy of transcriptions, and through ensuring the relevance of the analysis. We provide a protocol to guide how future joint analysis groups could be run.

Notes