Difference between revisions of "Turowetz2015"
PaultenHave (talk | contribs) (Created page with "{{BibEntry |BibType=ARTICLE |Author(s)=Jason Turowetz; |Title=The Interactional Production of a Clinical Fact in a Case of Autism |Tag(s)=EMCA; Medical; Autism; Diagnosis; St...") |
AndreiKorbut (talk | contribs) |
||
| (One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{BibEntry | {{BibEntry | ||
|BibType=ARTICLE | |BibType=ARTICLE | ||
| − | |Author(s)=Jason Turowetz; | + | |Author(s)=Jason Turowetz; |
| − | |Title=The | + | |Title=The interactional production of a clinical fact in a case of autism |
| − | |Tag(s)=EMCA; Medical; Autism; Diagnosis; Storytelling; | + | |Tag(s)=EMCA; Medical; Autism; Diagnosis; Storytelling; |
|Key=Turowetz2015 | |Key=Turowetz2015 | ||
|Year=2015 | |Year=2015 | ||
| + | |Language=English | ||
|Journal=Qualitative Sociology | |Journal=Qualitative Sociology | ||
|Volume=38 | |Volume=38 | ||
|Number=1 | |Number=1 | ||
|Pages=57–78 | |Pages=57–78 | ||
| − | |Abstract=The authority to diagnose is a distinguishing prerogative of modern medicine. | + | |URL=https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs11133-014-9294-8 |
| − | While a growing body of research addresses various aspects of diagnosis, few studies analyze just how it is achieved through talk-in-interaction. This paper examines how clinicians assembled a diagnosis of a child who was evaluated for autism. Drawing on audio and video recordings at a clinic for developmental disabilities, I use a combination of ethnomethodology and conversation analysis to show how a critical fact about the child’s mental functioning was | + | |DOI=10.1007/s11133-014-9294-8 |
| − | formulated, challenged, and transformed across three consecutive stages of his | + | |Abstract=The authority to diagnose is a distinguishing prerogative of modern medicine. While a growing body of research addresses various aspects of diagnosis, few studies analyze just how it is achieved through talk-in-interaction. This paper examines how clinicians assembled a diagnosis of a child who was evaluated for autism. Drawing on audio and video recordings at a clinic for developmental disabilities, I use a combination of ethnomethodology and conversation analysis to show how a critical fact about the child’s mental functioning was formulated, challenged, and transformed across three consecutive stages of his evaluation: (1) testing, (2) a case conference among clinicians, and (3) an informing interview where the diagnosis was delivered to the parents. I analyze how this fact emerged as an outcome of clinician-child interactions, and how clinicians used storytelling to render its diagnostic implications. In addition to examining how these stories are methodically produced, I argue that they frame the child’s behavior in ways that suggest a lack of competence while eliding the skills and competencies he may have been displaying. |
}} | }} | ||
Latest revision as of 09:28, 13 December 2019
| Turowetz2015 | |
|---|---|
| BibType | ARTICLE |
| Key | Turowetz2015 |
| Author(s) | Jason Turowetz |
| Title | The interactional production of a clinical fact in a case of autism |
| Editor(s) | |
| Tag(s) | EMCA, Medical, Autism, Diagnosis, Storytelling |
| Publisher | |
| Year | 2015 |
| Language | English |
| City | |
| Month | |
| Journal | Qualitative Sociology |
| Volume | 38 |
| Number | 1 |
| Pages | 57–78 |
| URL | Link |
| DOI | 10.1007/s11133-014-9294-8 |
| ISBN | |
| Organization | |
| Institution | |
| School | |
| Type | |
| Edition | |
| Series | |
| Howpublished | |
| Book title | |
| Chapter | |
Abstract
The authority to diagnose is a distinguishing prerogative of modern medicine. While a growing body of research addresses various aspects of diagnosis, few studies analyze just how it is achieved through talk-in-interaction. This paper examines how clinicians assembled a diagnosis of a child who was evaluated for autism. Drawing on audio and video recordings at a clinic for developmental disabilities, I use a combination of ethnomethodology and conversation analysis to show how a critical fact about the child’s mental functioning was formulated, challenged, and transformed across three consecutive stages of his evaluation: (1) testing, (2) a case conference among clinicians, and (3) an informing interview where the diagnosis was delivered to the parents. I analyze how this fact emerged as an outcome of clinician-child interactions, and how clinicians used storytelling to render its diagnostic implications. In addition to examining how these stories are methodically produced, I argue that they frame the child’s behavior in ways that suggest a lack of competence while eliding the skills and competencies he may have been displaying.
Notes
