Difference between revisions of "Jol-Stommel2021"
SaulAlbert (talk | contribs) (BibTeX auto import 2022-02-28 02:26:03) |
AndreiKorbut (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{BibEntry | {{BibEntry | ||
| + | |BibType=ARTICLE | ||
| + | |Author(s)=Guusje Jol; Wyke Stommel; | ||
| + | |Title=The Interactional Costs of “Neutrality” in Police Interviews with Child Witnesses | ||
| + | |Tag(s)=Neutrality; Police interviews; Witnesses; Justice; EMCA; Affiliation | ||
|Key=Jol-Stommel2021 | |Key=Jol-Stommel2021 | ||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
|Year=2021 | |Year=2021 | ||
| − | | | + | |Language=English |
|Journal=Research on Language and Social Interaction | |Journal=Research on Language and Social Interaction | ||
|Volume=54 | |Volume=54 | ||
|Number=3 | |Number=3 | ||
|Pages=299–318 | |Pages=299–318 | ||
| + | |URL=https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/08351813.2021.1939532 | ||
|DOI=10.1080/08351813.2021.1939532 | |DOI=10.1080/08351813.2021.1939532 | ||
|Abstract=This paper concerns the interactional dilemma between displaying affiliation and doing being neutral. This dilemma is highly salient in police interviews with child witnesses where interviewing guidelines encourage police officers to take a neutral stance to avoid steering children's stories. In this article, we use conversation analysis to analyze childrens' volunteered accounts of their own role during the alleged offense, e.g., how they resisted. Such accounts make relevant affiliative uptakes such as approval, disagreement, or reassurance that may be seen as nonneutral. Hence, these accounts raise interactional dilemmas for police officers: Should they do what is interactionally relevant or follow the guidelines? Our analysis shows how police officers display and deal with this dilemma and that children may add to it by pursuing something more than neutralistic uptakes. The upshot of this analysis is that attempting to be neutral in interaction may cause apparently undesirable interactional difficulties. The data are from the Netherlands. | |Abstract=This paper concerns the interactional dilemma between displaying affiliation and doing being neutral. This dilemma is highly salient in police interviews with child witnesses where interviewing guidelines encourage police officers to take a neutral stance to avoid steering children's stories. In this article, we use conversation analysis to analyze childrens' volunteered accounts of their own role during the alleged offense, e.g., how they resisted. Such accounts make relevant affiliative uptakes such as approval, disagreement, or reassurance that may be seen as nonneutral. Hence, these accounts raise interactional dilemmas for police officers: Should they do what is interactionally relevant or follow the guidelines? Our analysis shows how police officers display and deal with this dilemma and that children may add to it by pursuing something more than neutralistic uptakes. The upshot of this analysis is that attempting to be neutral in interaction may cause apparently undesirable interactional difficulties. The data are from the Netherlands. | ||
}} | }} | ||
Latest revision as of 10:22, 24 November 2022
| Jol-Stommel2021 | |
|---|---|
| BibType | ARTICLE |
| Key | Jol-Stommel2021 |
| Author(s) | Guusje Jol, Wyke Stommel |
| Title | The Interactional Costs of “Neutrality” in Police Interviews with Child Witnesses |
| Editor(s) | |
| Tag(s) | Neutrality, Police interviews, Witnesses, Justice, EMCA, Affiliation |
| Publisher | |
| Year | 2021 |
| Language | English |
| City | |
| Month | |
| Journal | Research on Language and Social Interaction |
| Volume | 54 |
| Number | 3 |
| Pages | 299–318 |
| URL | Link |
| DOI | 10.1080/08351813.2021.1939532 |
| ISBN | |
| Organization | |
| Institution | |
| School | |
| Type | |
| Edition | |
| Series | |
| Howpublished | |
| Book title | |
| Chapter | |
Abstract
This paper concerns the interactional dilemma between displaying affiliation and doing being neutral. This dilemma is highly salient in police interviews with child witnesses where interviewing guidelines encourage police officers to take a neutral stance to avoid steering children's stories. In this article, we use conversation analysis to analyze childrens' volunteered accounts of their own role during the alleged offense, e.g., how they resisted. Such accounts make relevant affiliative uptakes such as approval, disagreement, or reassurance that may be seen as nonneutral. Hence, these accounts raise interactional dilemmas for police officers: Should they do what is interactionally relevant or follow the guidelines? Our analysis shows how police officers display and deal with this dilemma and that children may add to it by pursuing something more than neutralistic uptakes. The upshot of this analysis is that attempting to be neutral in interaction may cause apparently undesirable interactional difficulties. The data are from the Netherlands.
Notes
