“D’yuh like porridge”: Social talk as a relational, interactional, and clinical component of surgical consultations
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.7146/qhc.v1i1.125968Keywords:
conversation analysis, consultation, small talk, surgeonAbstract
Background: Small talk and social talk are often recommended to doctors as rapport building strategies for consultations. These types of talk occur across different activities in clinical consultations. Aim: To explore how small talk and social talk are used in surgical consultations. Methods: Using conversation analysis, we examined the sequential positioning and action ascription of small talk and social talk in a sample of video-recorded surgeon-patient consultations from New Zealand and Australia. Results: Small talk and social talk sequences almost always do more than build rapport in surgical interactions. Rather, they contribute in complex ways to all three institutional agendas of a consultation – clinical, interactional, and relational. Discussion: This study broadens previous topic-based analyses and binary or linear conceptualisations. We show that small talk and social talk provide a rich resource for enabling different actions within consultations as well as managing relationships (e.g. managing transitions between activities, facilitating sensitive discussions or examinations, and supporting treatment planning). Conclusion: This study has provided a basis for further research to more fully understand the complexities of small talk and social talk in clinical consultations, as well as considerations of how such evidence might best be applied within training and assessment for clinicians.
References
ARCH website. (2021). https://www.otago.ac.nz/wellington/research/arch/. Retrieved from https://www.otago.ac.nz/wellington/research/arch/
Barnes, R. K. (2019). Conversation Analysis of Communication in Medical Care: Description and Beyond. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 52(3), 300-315. https://doi.org/10.1080/08351813.2019.1631056
Cole, S. A., & Bird, J. (2013). The medical interview e-book: The three function approach: Elsevier Health Sciences.
Defibaugh, S. (2017). Small talk as work talk: Enacting the patient-centered approach in nurse-practitioner-patient visits. Communication & medicine, 14(2), 97-107. https://doi.org/10.1558/cam.31374
Dowell, A., Stubbe, M., Scott-Dowell, K., Macdonald, L., & Dew, K. (2013). Talking with the alien: interaction with computers in the GP consultation. Australian Journal of Primary Health, 19(4), 275-282. https://doi.org/10.1071/PY13036
Fortin, A. H., Smith, R. C., Frankel, R. M., & Dwamena, F. C. (2018). Smith’s patient centered interviewing: an evidence-based method: McGraw-Hill.
Heritage, J. (2012). Epistemics in Conversation. In The handbook of conversation analysis (pp. 370-394): John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Heritage, J., & Clayman, S. (2010). Talk in action: Interactions, identities, and institutions. West Sussex: Wiley-Blackwell.
Heritage, J., & Stivers, T. (1999). Online commentary in acute medical visits: a method of shaping patient expectations. Social Science and Medicine, 49, 1501-1517. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0277-9536(99)00219-1
Holmes, J. (2000). Doing collegiality and keeping control at work: Small talk in government departments. Small talk, 32, 61.
Holmes, J. (2003). Small Talk at Work: Potential Problems for Workers With an Intellectual Disability. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 36(1), 65-84. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327973RLSI3601_4
Hudak, P. L., Clark, S. J., & Raymond, G. (2012). The Omni-Relevance of Surgery: How Medical Specialization Shapes Orthopedic Surgeons' Treatment Recommendations. Health Communication, 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1080/10410236.2012.702642
Hudak, P. L., & Maynard, D. W. (2011). An interactional approach to conceptualising small talk in medical interactions. Sociology of Health and Illness, 33(4), 634-653. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9566.2011.01343.x
Jefferson, G. (1972). Side Sequences. In G. Jefferson & D. Sudnow (Eds.), Studies in social interaction (pp. 294–338). New York: Free Press.
Jin, Y. (2018). Small talk in medical conversations: Data from China. Journal of Pragmatics, 134, 31-44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2018.06.011
Landmark, A. M. D., Gulbrandsen, P., & Svennevig, J. (2015). Whose decision? Negotiating epistemic and deontic rights in medical treatment decisions. Journal of Pragmatics, 78, 54-69. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2014.11.007
Levinson, S. C. (2012). Action Formation and Ascription. In The handbook of conversation analysis (pp. 101-130): John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Macdonald, L. M. (2016). Expertise in Everyday Nurse–Patient Conversations: The Importance of Small Talk. Global qualitative nursing research, 3. https://doi.org/10.1177/2333393616643201
Mauksch, L. B., Dugdale, D. C., Dodson, S., & Epstein, R. (2008). Relationship, communication, and efficiency in the medical encounter: creating a clinical model from a literature review. Archives of Internal Medicine, 168(13), 1387-1395. https://doi.org/10.1001/archinte.168.13.1387
Maynard, D. W., & Hudak, P. L. (2008). Small talk, high stakes: Interaction disattentiveness in the context of prosocial doctor-patient interaction. Language in Society, 37, 661-688. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404508080986
Peräkylä, A. (2011). Validity in research on naturally occurring social interaction. In D. Silverman (Ed.), Qualitative research (3rd ed., pp. 365-382). London: Sage.
Plumridge, E., Goodyear‐Smith, F., & Ross, J. (2009). Nurse and parent partnership during children’s vaccinations: a conversation analysis. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 65(6), 1187-1194. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2648.2009.04999.x
Robinson, J. D. (2003). An Interactional Structure of Medical Activities During Acute Visits and Its Implications for Patients' Participation. Health Communication, 15(1), 27-59. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327027HC1501_2
Silverman, J., Kurtz, S. M., & Draper, J. (2013). Skills for communicating with patients. Oxford: Radcliffe Pub.
Steensig, J., & Drew, P. (2008). Introduction: questioning and affiliation/ disaffiliation in interaction. Discourse Studies, 10(1), 5-15. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445607085581
Stevanovic, M., & Svennevig, J. (2015). Introduction: Epistemics and deontics in conversational directives. Journal of Pragmatics, 78, 1-6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2015.01.008
Stubbe, M. ( 2017). Evolution by Design: Building a New Zealand Corpus of Health Interactions. In M. Marra & P. Warren (Eds.), Linguist at work: Festschrift for Janet Holmes (pp. 196-214). Wellington: Victoria University Press.
Walsh, I. P. (2007). Small talk is “big talk” in clinical discourse: Appreciating the value of conversation in SLP clinical interactions. Topics in Language Disorders, 27(1), 24-36. https://doi.org/10.1097/00011363-200701000-00004
Weidner, M. (2015). Telling somebody what to tell: “Proszę mi powiedzieć” in Polish doctor–patient interaction. Journal of Pragmatics, 78, 70-83. https://doi.org/0.1016/j.pragma.2015.01.006
White, S. J. (2015). Closing clinical consultations. In A. Busch & T. Spranz-Fogasy (Eds.), Sprache in der medizin [Language in medicine] (pp. 170-187). Berlin: De Gruyter.
White, S. J., Stubbe, M., Macdonald, L., Dowell, A., Dew, K., & Gardner, R. (2014). Framing the consultation: the role of the referral in surgeon-patient consultations. Health Communication, 29(1), 74-80. https://doi.org/10.1080/10410236.2012.718252
White, S. J., Stubbe, M. H., Dew, K. P., Macdonald, L. M., Dowell, A. C., & Gardner, R. (2013). Understanding communication between surgeon and patient in outpatient consultations. ANZ Journal of Surgery, 83(5), 307-311. https://doi.org/10.1111/ans.12126
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Articles submitted to Qualitative Health Communication should not be submitted to or published in other journals.
Articles published in Qualitative Health Communication may be used (downloaded) and reused (distributed, copied, cited) for non-commercial purposes with reference to the authors and publication host.
For all publications published in the first four issues, i.e. 1(1), 1(2), 2(1) and 3(1), copyright is shared between the author and QHC. For all future publications, the author is the sole copyright holder.
