Disruptive Touch and Accountability
Embodied Disalignment in Physical Examinations During Medical Consultations
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.7146/si.v9i1.144865Keywords:
touch, physical examination, medical consultation, embodiment, multimodal conversation analysisAbstract
Using multimodal conversation analysis, we investigated a phenomenon in which the organization of physical examination in the medical consultation is disrupted by patients’ embodied displays of pain and withdrawal from the doctor’s touch, and doctors’ practices in managing those withdrawals. Such instances break the organization of the interaction and can thus be seen to encode patients’ disalignment with the ongoing activity. We present how the participants orient to the disalignments as accountable and, with that, restore the organization. The data consist of Finnish general practitioners’ consultations with patients suffering from upper respiratory tract problems.
References
´Beach, W. A. (1995a). Conversation analysis: “Okay” as a clue for understanding conse quentiality. In S. J. Sigman (Ed.), The consequentiality of communication (pp. 121–161). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Beach, W. A. (1995b). Preserving and constraining options: “Okays” and “official” priorities in medical interviews. In B. Morris & R. Chenail (Eds.), Talk of the clinic: Explorations in the analysis of medical and therapeutic discourse (pp. 259–290). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Cekaite, A. (2016). Touch as social control: Haptic organization of attention in adult–child interactions. Journal of Pragmatics, 92(1), 30–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2015.11.003
Cekaite, A., & Mondada, L. (2020). Touch in social interaction: Touch, language and body. Taylor & Francis Group.
Drew, P., & Heritage, J. (1992). Analyzing talk at work: An introduction. In P. Drew & J. Heritage (Eds.), Talk at work: Interaction in institutional settings (pp. 3–65). Cambridge University Press.
Fuchs, T. (2017). Intercorporeality and interaffectivity. In C. Meyer, J. Streeck, & J. S. Jordan (Eds.), Intercorporeality: Emerging socialities in interaction (pp. 56–76). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780190210465.003.0001
Garfinkel, H. (1967). Studies in ethnomethodology. Prentice-Hall.
Goffman, E. (1963). Behavior in public places. Notes on the social organization of gatherings. The Free Press.
Haakana, M. (2002). Laughter in medical interaction: From quantification to analysis, and back. Blackwell.
Heath, C. (1986). Body movement and speech in medical interaction. Cambridge University Press.
Heath, C. (1988). Embarrassment and interactional organization. In P. Drew & A. Wootton (Eds.), Erving Goffman: Exploring the interaction order (pp. 136–160). Polity Press.
Heath, C. (1989). Pain talk: The expression of suffering in the medical consultation. Social Psychology Quarterly, 52(2), 113–125. https://doi.org/10.2307/2786911
Heath, C. (2006). Body work: The collaborative production of the clinical object. In J. Heritage & D. W. Maynard (Eds.), Communication in medical care: Interaction between care physicians and patients (pp. 185–213). Cambridge University Press.
Heritage, J. (1984). Garfinkel and ethnomethodology. Polity Press.
Heritage, J., & Stivers, T. (1999). Online commentary in acute medical visits: a method of shaping patient expectations. Social science & medicine (1982), 49(11), 1501–1517. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0277-9536(99)00219-1
Jefferson, G. (1985). On the organization of laughter in talk about troubles. In J. M. Atkinson (Ed.), Structures of Social Action (pp. 346–369). chapter, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Jenkins, L., & Hepburn, A. (2015). Children’s sensations as interactional phenomena: A conversation analysis of children’s expressions of pain and discomfort. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 12(4), 472–491.
Katila, J. (2018). Tactile Intercorporeality in a Group of Mothers and Their Children: a Micro Study of Practices for Intimacy and Participation. Tampere: Juvenes Print.
Katila, J., Hofstetter E., & Keevallik, L. (2023). Cries of pleasure and pain: Vocalizations communicating how touch feels in romantic relationships. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 56(4), 330–349. https://doi.org/10.1080/08351813.2023.2272529
Katila, J., & Philipsen, J. S. (2022). Forms of professional interkinesthesia in nurses’ body work: A case study of an infant’s stepping. Frontiers in Communication, 7, Article 954483. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcomm.2022.954483
Katila, J., & Raudaskoski, S. (2020). Interaction analysis as an embodied and interactive process: Multimodal, co-operative, and intercorporeal ways of seeing video data as complementary professional visions. Human Studies, 43, p. 445–470. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10746-020-09553-4
Katila, J., Guo, E. & Cekaite, A. (2025). Shepherding the emotion: Embodied socialization of emotion in paediatric dental interactions. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 52, 100895.
Marcinowicz L, Konstantynowicz J, Godlewski C. (2010). Patients' perceptions of GP non-verbal communication: a qualitative study. British Journal of General Practice. 60(571), 83-7. https://doi.org/10.3399/bjgp10X483111
McArthur, A. (2018). Getting pain on the table in primary care physical exams. Social Science & Medicine, 200(5), pp. 190–198. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2018.01.012
McArthur, A. (2019). Pain and the collision of expertise in primary care physical exams. Discourse studies. 21(5) 522–539.
McArthur, A. (2021). Affect and accountability: Pain displays as a resource for action. In J. Robles (Ed.), How emotions are made in talk (pp. 263–285). John Benjamins.
Merleau-Ponty, M. (1962). Phenomenology of perception. Routledge.
Mondada, L. (2019a). Contemporary issues in conversation analysis: Embodiment and materiality: Multimodality and multisensoriality in social interaction. Journal of Pragmatics, 145, 47–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2019.01.016
Mondada, L. (2019b). Conventions for multimodal transcription. Retrieved April 2, 2024, from https://www.lorenzamondada.net/multimodal-transcription.
Robinson, J.D., & Stivers, T. (2001). Achieving activity transitions in primary-care encounters: From history taking to physical examination. Human Communication Research, 27, 253–298.
Ruusuvuori, J. (2005). ‘Empathy’ and ‘sympathy’ in action: Attending to patients’ troubles in Finnish homeopathic and general practice consultations. Social Psychology Quarterly 68, 204–222.
Stivers, T. Mondada, L., & Steensig, J. (2011). In T. Stivers, L. Mondada, & J. Steensig (Eds.), The morality of knowledge in conversation (pp. 3–24). Cambridge University Press.
Streeck, J. (2009b). Gesturecraft: The manu-facture of meaning. John Benjamins Publishing Company. ProQuest Ebook Central.
Uotinen, J. (2011). Senses, bodily knowledge, and autoethnography: Unbeknown knowledge from an ICU experience. Qualitative Health Research, 21(10), 1307–1315. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732311413908
Weatherall, A., Keevallik, L., La, J., Dowell, T., & Stubbe, M. (2021). The multimodality and temporality of pain displays. Language & Communication, 80(5), 56–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langcom.2021.05.008
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 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.
