Difference between revisions of "Lester-OReilly2016a"

From emcawiki
Jump to: navigation, search
(Created page with "{{BibEntry |BibType=INCOLLECTION |Author(s)=Jessica Nina Lester; Michelle O'Reilly; |Title=The History and Landscape of Conversation and Discourse Analysis |Editor(s)=Michell...")
 
 
Line 1: Line 1:
 
{{BibEntry
 
{{BibEntry
 
|BibType=INCOLLECTION
 
|BibType=INCOLLECTION
|Author(s)=Jessica Nina Lester; Michelle O'Reilly;  
+
|Author(s)=Jessica Nina Lester; Michelle O'Reilly;
|Title=The History and Landscape of Conversation and Discourse Analysis
+
|Title=The history and landscape of conversation and discourse analysis
|Editor(s)=Michelle O'Reilly; Jessica Nina Lester;  
+
|Editor(s)=Michelle O'Reilly; Jessica Nina Lester;
|Tag(s)=EMCA; Qualitative methods; Discourse Analysis; Mental Health;  
+
|Tag(s)=EMCA; Qualitative methods; Discourse Analysis; Mental Health;
 
|Key=Lester-OReilly2016a
 
|Key=Lester-OReilly2016a
 +
|Publisher=Palgrave Macmillan
 
|Year=2016
 
|Year=2016
 +
|Language=English
 +
|Address=London
 
|Booktitle=The Palgrave Handbook of Adult Mental Health
 
|Booktitle=The Palgrave Handbook of Adult Mental Health
|Pages=23-44
+
|Pages=23–44
 
|URL=http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1057/9781137496850_2
 
|URL=http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1057/9781137496850_2
 
|DOI=10.1057/9781137496850_2
 
|DOI=10.1057/9781137496850_2
 
|Abstract=Mental distress has typically been examined from a biomedical or biopsychosocial perspective with quantitative evidence (especially, randomised controlled trials) being favoured. Over the last few decades there has been a growth and greater acceptance of qualitative methods and an increasing emphasis on applied qualitative research, which has been useful in the field of mental health. However, qualitative evidence has been typically, and arguably inappropriately, placed at the bottom level of evidence in the field of health and medicine (Lester & O’Reilly, 2015). Nonetheless, there is a growing acceptance that qualitative approaches offer a great deal for understanding the complexities of mental distress. More specifically, qualitative methodologies, such as conversation and discourse analysis (henceforth DA), have the added benefit of involving a close examination of the realities of individuals diagnosed with mental health conditions and the many interactions that surround their everyday lives.
 
|Abstract=Mental distress has typically been examined from a biomedical or biopsychosocial perspective with quantitative evidence (especially, randomised controlled trials) being favoured. Over the last few decades there has been a growth and greater acceptance of qualitative methods and an increasing emphasis on applied qualitative research, which has been useful in the field of mental health. However, qualitative evidence has been typically, and arguably inappropriately, placed at the bottom level of evidence in the field of health and medicine (Lester & O’Reilly, 2015). Nonetheless, there is a growing acceptance that qualitative approaches offer a great deal for understanding the complexities of mental distress. More specifically, qualitative methodologies, such as conversation and discourse analysis (henceforth DA), have the added benefit of involving a close examination of the realities of individuals diagnosed with mental health conditions and the many interactions that surround their everyday lives.
 
 
}}
 
}}

Latest revision as of 10:50, 26 December 2019

Lester-OReilly2016a
BibType INCOLLECTION
Key Lester-OReilly2016a
Author(s) Jessica Nina Lester, Michelle O'Reilly
Title The history and landscape of conversation and discourse analysis
Editor(s) Michelle O'Reilly, Jessica Nina Lester
Tag(s) EMCA, Qualitative methods, Discourse Analysis, Mental Health
Publisher Palgrave Macmillan
Year 2016
Language English
City London
Month
Journal
Volume
Number
Pages 23–44
URL Link
DOI 10.1057/9781137496850_2
ISBN
Organization
Institution
School
Type
Edition
Series
Howpublished
Book title The Palgrave Handbook of Adult Mental Health
Chapter

Download BibTex

Abstract

Mental distress has typically been examined from a biomedical or biopsychosocial perspective with quantitative evidence (especially, randomised controlled trials) being favoured. Over the last few decades there has been a growth and greater acceptance of qualitative methods and an increasing emphasis on applied qualitative research, which has been useful in the field of mental health. However, qualitative evidence has been typically, and arguably inappropriately, placed at the bottom level of evidence in the field of health and medicine (Lester & O’Reilly, 2015). Nonetheless, there is a growing acceptance that qualitative approaches offer a great deal for understanding the complexities of mental distress. More specifically, qualitative methodologies, such as conversation and discourse analysis (henceforth DA), have the added benefit of involving a close examination of the realities of individuals diagnosed with mental health conditions and the many interactions that surround their everyday lives.

Notes