Co-constructing the Video Consultation-competent patient
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.7146/si.v3i3.122708Keywords:
video consultation, geriatric patients, co-construction, multimodality, rehabilitation, healthcare, VC-competences, video mediation, telepresence robot, participation frameworkAbstract
Through detailed multimodal EMCA analysis, this paper explores consultations between a geriatric patient in a residential rehabilitation facility, his local caregivers, his relative, and his GP, who is present via telepresence robot. The analysis focuses on a) the patient’s interaction with the telepresence robot and the other participants in the opening sequences, including the establishment of joint attention, as a mutual accomplishment; b) how the role of “the competent Video Consultation (VC)-patient” is negotiated and co-constructed (Goodwin, 2013; Jacoby & Ochs, 1995) over time; and c) how the patient displays increasing VC-competences and develops practices associated with a situational identity as “tech-savvy patient” (Suchman, 2009; Zimmerman, 2008).
References
Arminen, I., Licoppe, C., & Spagnolli, A. (2016). Respecifying Mediated Interaction. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 49(4), 290–309. https://doi.org/10.1080/08351813.2016.1234614
Brouwer, C. E., & Wagner, J. (2004). Developmental issues in second language conversation. Journal of Applied Linguistics, 1(1), 29–47. https://doi.org/10.1558/japl.1.1.29.55873
Deppermann, A. (2013). Turn-design at turn-beginnings: Multimodal resources to deal with tasks of turn-construction in German. Journal of Pragmatics, 46(1), 91–121. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2012.07.010
Doehler, S. P. (2010). Conceptual Changes and Methodological Challenges: On Language and Learning from a Conversation Analytic Perspective on SLA. In P. Seedhouse, S. Walsh, & C. Jenks (Eds.), Conceptualising ‘Learning’ in Applied Linguistics (pp. 105–126). London: Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230289772_7
Due, B. (forth). RoboDoc: Semiotic resources for achieving face-to-screenface formation with a telepresence robot. Semiotica.
Esterle, L., & Mathieu-Fritz, A. (2013). Teleconsultation in geriatrics: Impact on professional practice. International Journal of Medical Informatics, 82(8), 684–695. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2013.04.006
Geoffroy, O., Acar, P., Caillet, D., Edmar, A., Crepin, D., Salvodelli, M., Dulac, Y., & Paranon, S. (2008). Videoconference pediatric and congenital cardiology consultations: A new application in telemedicine. Archives of Cardiovascular Diseases, 101(2), 89–93. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1875-2136(08)70264-X
Goffman, E. (1981). Forms of Talk. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
Goodwin, C. (1979). The Interactive Construction of a Sentence in Natural Conversation. In G. Psathas (Ed.), Everyday Language: Studies in Ethnomethodology (pp. 97–121). New York: Irvington Publishers.
Goodwin, C. (1981). Conversational organization: Interaction between speakers and hearers. New York: Academic Press.
Goodwin, C. (2000). Action and embodiment within situated human interaction. Journal of Pragmatics, 32(10), 1489–1522. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(99)00096-X
Goodwin, C. (2007). Participation, stance and affect in the organization of activities. Discourse & Society, 18(1), 53–73. https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926507069457
Goodwin, C. (2013). The co-operative, transformative organization of human action and knowledge. Journal of Pragmatics, 46(1), 8–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2012.09.003
Goodwin, C. (2018). Why Multimodality? Why Co-Operative Action? (transcribed by J. Philipsen). Social Interaction. Video-Based Studies of Human Sociality, 1(2). https://doi.org/10.7146/si.v1i2.110039
Greenhalgh, T., Vijayaraghavan, S., Wherton, J., Shaw, S., Byrne, E., Campbell-Richards, D., Bhattacharya, S., Hanson, P., Ramoutar, S., Gutteridge, C., Hodkinson, I., Collard, A., & Morris, J. (2016). Virtual online consultations: Advantages and limitations (VOCAL) study. BMJ Open, 6(1), e009388. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2015-009388
Greer, T. (2016). Learner initiative in action: Post-expansion sequences in a novice ESL survey interview task. Linguistics and Education, 35, 78–87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2016.06.004
Greer, T. (2018). Learning to say grace. Social Interaction. Video-Based Studies of Human Sociality, 1(1). https://doi.org/10.7146/si.v1i1.105499
Hall, J. K., Hellermann, J., & Pekarek Doehler, S. (2011). L2 Interactional Competence and Development. Channel View Publications. http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/kbdk/detail.action?docID=837799
Hassert, Liv Otto; Nielsen,Mie Femø; Nielsen, Ann Merrit Rikke. (2016). Møder via video, web eller telefon. In Kommunikation i internationale virksomheder (Vol. 1, pp. 173–202). Copenhagen: Samfundslitteratur.
Have, P. ten. (1989). 6. The Consultation as a Genre. In Text and talk as social practice. Discourse difference and division in speech and writing (Reprint 2016, Vol. 2). Den Haag: De Gruyter Mouton. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783111684369-008
Heath, C. (1981). The opening sequence in doctor-patient interaction. In P. Atkinson & C. Heath (Eds.), Medical work: Realities and routines (pp. 71–90). Gower: Farnborough.
Heath, C. (Ed.). (1986). Forms of participation. In Body Movement and Speech in Medical Interaction (pp. 76–98). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511628221.006
Hellermann, J. (2007). The Development of Practices for Action in Classroom Dyadic Interaction: Focus on Task Openings. The Modern Language Journal, 91(1), 83–96. JSTOR. https://www.jstor.org/stable/4127089
Heritage, J., & Maynard, D. W. (2006). Introduction: Analyzing interaction between doctors and patients in primary care encounters. In Heritage, J. & Maynard, D. W. (eds): Communication in medical care, interaction between primary care physicians and patients (p. 21). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Jacoby, S., & Ochs, E. (1995). Co-Construction: An Introduction. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 28(3), 171–183. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327973rlsi2803_1
Jefferson, G. (2004). Glossary of transcript symbols with an introduction. In G. H. Lerner (Ed.), Conversation Analysis: Studies from the first generation (pp. 13–31). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Co.
Kidwell, M., & Zimmerman, D. H. (2007). Joint attention as action. Journal of Pragmatics, 39(3), 592–611. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2006.07.012
Lee, Y.-A., & Hellermann, J. (2014). Tracing Developmental Changes Through Conversation Analysis: Cross-Sectional and Longitudinal Analysis. TESOL Quarterly, 48(4), 763–788. JSTOR. https://www.jstor.org/stable/43268016
Levinson, S. C. (1988). Putting linguistics on a proper footing: Explorations in Goffman’s participation framework. In P. Drew & A. Wootton (Eds.), Goffman: Exploring the interaction order (pp. 161–227). Oxford: Polity Press.
Lundvoll Nilsen, L. (2011). Collaborative Work by Using Videoconferencing: Opportunities for Learning in Daily Medical Practice. Qualitative Health Research, 21(8), 1147–1158. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732311405683
Markee, N. (2008). Toward a Learning Behavior Tracking Methodology for CA-for-SLA. Applied Linguistics, 29(3), 404–427. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amm052
Martin, C., & Sahlström, F. (2010). Learning as Longitudinal Interactional Change: From Other-Repair to Self-Repair in Physiotherapy Treatment. Discourse Processes, 47(8), 668–697. https://doi.org/10.1080/01638531003628965
Maynard, D. W., & Heritage, J. (2005). Conversation analysis, doctor–patient interaction and medical communication. Medical Education, 39(4), 428–435. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2929.2005.02111.x
Melander, H., & Sahlström, F. (2009). Learning to Fly—The Progressive Development of Situation Awareness. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 53(2), 151–166. https://doi.org/10.1080/00313830902757576
Mlynář, J., González-Martínez, E., & Lalanne, D. (2018). Situated organization of video-mediated interaction: A review of ethnomethodological and conversation analytic studies. Interacting with Computers, 30(2), 73–84. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1093/iwc/iwx019
Mondada, L. (2007). Multimodal resources for turn-taking: Pointing and the emergence of possible next speakers. Discourse Studies, 9(2), 194–225. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445607075346
Mondada, L. (2015). Ouverture et préouverture des réunions visiophoniques. Reseaux, n° 194(6), 39–84. https://www.cairn.info/revue-reseaux-2015-6-page-39.htm
Nguyen, H. thi. (2012). Introduction. In H. thi Nguyen (Ed.), Developing Interactional Competence: A Conversation-Analytic Study of Patient Consultations in Pharmacy (pp. 1–13). Palgrave Macmillan UK. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230319660_1
Nguyen, H. thi. (2017). Toward a Conversation Analytic Framework for Tracking Interactional Competence Development from School to Work. In S. Pekarek Doehler, A. Bangerter, G. de Weck, L. Filliettaz, E. González-Martínez, & C. Petitjean (Eds.), Interactional Competences in Institutional Settings: From School to the Workplace (pp. 197–225). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-46867-9_8
Nielsen, L. O., Krebs, H. J., Albert, N. M., Anderson, N., Catz, S., Hale, T. M., Hansen, J., Hounsgaard, L., Kim, T. Y., Lindeman, D., Spindler, H., Marcin, J. P., Nesbitt, T., Young, H. M., & Dinesen, B. (2017). Telemedicine in Greenland: Citizens’ Perspectives. Telemedicine and E-Health, 23(5), 441–447. https://doi.org/10.1089/tmj.2016.0134
PAconsulting. (2018). Analyse af skærmbesøg og virtuelle konsultationer (p. 83). Digitaliseringsstyrelssen.
Pappas, Y., & Seale, C. (2009). The opening phase of telemedicine consultations: An analysis of interaction. Social Science & Medicine, 68(7), 1229–1237. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2009.01.011
Pekarek Doehler, S., & Petitjean, C. (2017). Introduction: Interactional Competences in Institutional Settings – Young People Between School and Work. In S. Pekarek Doehler, A. Bangerter, G. de Weck, L. Filliettaz, E. González-Martínez, & C. Petitjean (Eds.), Interactional Competences in Institutional Settings: From School to the Workplace (pp. 1–26). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-46867-9_1
Pekarek Doehler, S., Wagner, J., & González-Martínez, E. (2018). Longitudinal Studies on the Organization of Social Interaction. Palgrave Macmillan Limited. http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/kbdk/detail.action?docID=5316909
Petersen, M. S., Morris, D. J., & Nielsen, M. F. (2016). A pilot study of telehealth and face-to-face consultations in diagnostic audiology. CIRCD Working papers in social interaction, 1(3), 1-38. Centre of Interaction Research and Communication Design, University of Copenhagen ISBN 978-87-93300-10-1
Rasmussen, G. (2016). Repeated use of request for confirmation in atypical interaction. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics, 30(10), 849–870. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699206.2016.1209244
Raudaskoski, P. L. (1999). The Use of Communicative Resources in Language Technology Environments: A Conversation Analytic Approach to Semiosis at Computer Media. Oulu: Åbo Akademis Tryckeri. https://vbn.aau.dk/en/publications/the-use-of-communicative-resources-in-language-technology-environ
Robinson, Jeffrey D., & Heritage, J. (2005). The structure of patients’ presenting concerns: The completion relevance of current symptoms. Social Science & Medicine, 61(2), 481–493. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2004.12.004
Robinson, Jeffrey David. (1998). Getting Down to Business Talk, Gaze, and Body Orientation During Openings of Doctor-Patient Consultations. Human Communication Research, 25(1), 97–123. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2958.1998.tb00438.x
Rossano, F., Brown, P., & Levinson, S. C. (2009). Gaze, questioning, and culture. In J. Sidnell (Ed.), Conversation Analysis: Comparative Perspectives (pp. 187–249). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511635670.008
Sacks, H. (1984). On doing “being ordinary.” In J. M. Atkinson & J. Heritage (Eds.), Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis (pp. 413–429). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511665868.024
Sacks, H., Schegloff, E. A., & Jefferson, G. (1974). A Simplest Systematics for the Organization of Turn-Taking for Conversation. Language, 50(4), 696. https://doi.org/10.2307/412243
Sävenstedt, S., Zingmark, K., & Sandman, P.-O. (2004). Being Present in a Distant Room: Aspects of Teleconsultations with Older People in a Nursing Home. Qualitative Health Research, 14(8), 1046–1057. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732304267754
Schegloff, E. A. (1979). Identification and Recognition in Telephone Conversation Openings. In G. Psathas (ed.) Everyday Language: Studies in Ethnomethodology, pp. 23–78. New York: Irvington .
Schegloff, E. A. (1985). On some gestures’ relation to talk. In J. M. Atkinson (Ed.), Structures of Social Action (pp. 266–296). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511665868.018
Schegloff, E. A., Jefferson, G., & Sacks, H. (1977). The Preference for Self-Correction in the Organization of Repair in Conversation. Language, 53(2), 361. https://doi.org/10.2307/413107
Suchman, L. (2009). Human-machine reconfigurations: Plans and situated actions / (2. ed., reprint.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
van den Berg, N., Schumann, M., Kraft, K., & Hoffmann, W. (2012). Telemedicine and telecare for older patients—A systematic review. Maturitas, 73(2), 94–114. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.maturitas.2012.06.010
Wagner, J., Pekarek Doehler, S., & González-Martínez, E. (2018). Longitudinal Research on the Organization of Social Interaction: Current Developments and Methodological Challenges. In S. Pekarek Doehler, J. Wagner, & E. González-Martínez (Eds.), Longitudinal Studies on the Organization of Social Interaction. Palgrave Macmillan Limited.
Webb, H., Lehn, D. vom, Heath, C., Gibson, W., & Evans, B. J. W. (2013). The Problem With “Problems”: The Case of Openings in Optometry Consultations. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 46(1), 65–83. https://doi.org/10.1080/08351813.2012.753724
Zimmerman, D. H. (2008). Identity, Context and Interaction. In Identities in Talk (pp. 88–106). London: SAGE Publications Ltd. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446216958.n6
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2020 Author and Journal
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
We follow the Budapest Open Access Initiative's definition of Open Access.
The journal allows the author(s) to hold the copyright without restrictions.
The journal allows software/spiders to automatically crawl the journal content (also known as text mining)
The journal provides article level metadata to DOAJ
The journal allows readers to read, download, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of its articles and allow readers to use them for any other lawful purpose.
