Difference between revisions of "Beach2003a"
(Created page with "{{BibEntry |BibType=ARTICLE |Author(s)=Wayne A. Beach; J. K. Anderson |Title=Communication and cancer? Part I: The noticeable absence of interactional research |Tag(s)=Medical...") |
m (first name) |
||
| (One intermediate revision by one other user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{BibEntry | {{BibEntry | ||
|BibType=ARTICLE | |BibType=ARTICLE | ||
| − | |Author(s)=Wayne A. Beach; | + | |Author(s)=Wayne A. Beach; Jennifer K. Anderson |
|Title=Communication and cancer? Part I: The noticeable absence of interactional research | |Title=Communication and cancer? Part I: The noticeable absence of interactional research | ||
|Tag(s)=Medical EMCA; Conversation Analysis; Methodology; Cancer; Family Relationships | |Tag(s)=Medical EMCA; Conversation Analysis; Methodology; Cancer; Family Relationships | ||
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
|Volume=21 | |Volume=21 | ||
|Number=3 | |Number=3 | ||
| − | |Pages= | + | |Pages=1–23 |
| + | |URL=http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1300/J077v21n03_01 | ||
| + | |DOI=10.1300/J077v21n03_01 | ||
| + | |Abstract=Although increasing attention is paid to communication in psychosocial oncology, a comprehensive review of the literature reveals that emphasis has been given to individuals' self-reported experiences. Because naturally occurring interactions between cancer patients, family members, and health professionals have not received systematic attention, the authors propose that an empirical foundation for understanding communication activities is in its infancy. In this two-part article, Part I expands on how communication has been identified as central to family relationships, yet has been accessed through individuals' reports. Specific examples drawn from both qualitative and quantitative research methods illustrate the predominance and limitations of self-reports for studying communication and psychosocial oncology. Part II provides an overview of “conversation analysis” as an alternative method for studying interactional patterns in medical encounters and family interactions. The discussion focuses on the usefulness of conversation analysis for oncology professionals and the possibilities for collaborative research. | ||
}} | }} | ||
Latest revision as of 08:24, 13 September 2018
| Beach2003a | |
|---|---|
| BibType | ARTICLE |
| Key | Beach2003a |
| Author(s) | Wayne A. Beach, Jennifer K. Anderson |
| Title | Communication and cancer? Part I: The noticeable absence of interactional research |
| Editor(s) | |
| Tag(s) | Medical EMCA, Conversation Analysis, Methodology, Cancer, Family Relationships |
| Publisher | |
| Year | 2003 |
| Language | |
| City | |
| Month | |
| Journal | Journal of Psychosocial Oncology |
| Volume | 21 |
| Number | 3 |
| Pages | 1–23 |
| URL | Link |
| DOI | 10.1300/J077v21n03_01 |
| ISBN | |
| Organization | |
| Institution | |
| School | |
| Type | |
| Edition | |
| Series | |
| Howpublished | |
| Book title | |
| Chapter | |
Abstract
Although increasing attention is paid to communication in psychosocial oncology, a comprehensive review of the literature reveals that emphasis has been given to individuals' self-reported experiences. Because naturally occurring interactions between cancer patients, family members, and health professionals have not received systematic attention, the authors propose that an empirical foundation for understanding communication activities is in its infancy. In this two-part article, Part I expands on how communication has been identified as central to family relationships, yet has been accessed through individuals' reports. Specific examples drawn from both qualitative and quantitative research methods illustrate the predominance and limitations of self-reports for studying communication and psychosocial oncology. Part II provides an overview of “conversation analysis” as an alternative method for studying interactional patterns in medical encounters and family interactions. The discussion focuses on the usefulness of conversation analysis for oncology professionals and the possibilities for collaborative research.
Notes
