Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Part of a Book (9)
- Article (5)
- Conference Proceeding (1)
Language
- English (15) (remove)
Keywords
- Konversationsanalyse (8)
- Deutsch (3)
- Interaktion (3)
- Argumentation (2)
- Coaching (2)
- Frage (2)
- Psychologische Diagnostik (2)
- Psychotherapie (2)
- formulations (2)
- Agumentation (1)
Publicationstate
- Postprint (5)
- Veröffentlichungsversion (4)
- Zweitveröffentlichung (3)
Reviewstate
- (Verlags)-Lektorat (5)
- Peer-Review (4)
Publisher
- Benjamins (6)
- Routledge (2)
- Equinox (1)
- Equinox Publ. (1)
- Frontiers Media S.A. (1)
- Lang (1)
- Nordisk Institut, Aarhus Universitet (1)
- Sic Sat (1)
- Springer (1)
Based on German data from history-taking in doctor-patient interaction, the paper shows that the three basic syntactic types of questions (questions fronted by a question-word (w-questions), verb-first (V1) questions, and declarative questions) provide different opportunities for displaying understanding in medical interaction. Each syntactic questionformat is predominantly used in a different stage of topical sequences in history taking: w-questions presuppose less knowledge and are thus used to open up topical sequences; declarative questions are used to check already achieved understandings and to close topical sequences. Still, the expected scope of answers to yes/no-questions and to declarative questions is less restricted than previously thought. The paper focuses in detail on the doctors’ use of formulations as declarative questions, which are designed to make patients elaborate on already established topics, giving more details or accounting for a confirmation. Formulations often involve a shift to psychological aspects of the illness. Although patients confirm doctors’ empathetic formulations, they, however, regularly do not align with this shift, returning to the description of symptoms and to biomedical accounts instead. The study shows how displays of understanding are responded to not only in terms of correctness, but also (and more importantly) in terms of their relevance for further action.
Coaching outcome research convincingly argues that coaching is effective and facilitates change in clients. While coaching practice literature depicts questions as key vehicle for such change, empirical findings as regards the local and global change potential of questions are so far largely missing in both (psychological) outcome research and (linguistic and psychological) process research on coaching. The local change potential of questions refers to a turn-by-turn transformation as a result of their sequentiality, the global change potential is related to the power of questions to initiate, process and finalize established phases of change. This programmatic article on questions, or rather questioning sequences, in executive coaching pursues two goals: firstly, it takes stock of available insights into questions in coaching and advocates for Conversation Analysis as a fruitful methodological framework to assess the local change potential of questioning sequences. Secondly, it points to the limitations of a local turn-by-turn approach to unravel the overall change potential of questions and calls for an interdisciplinary approach to bring both local and global effectiveness into relation. Such an approach is premised on conversational sequentiality and psychological theories of change and facilitates research on questioning sequences as both local and global agents of change across the continuum of coaching sessions. We present the TSPP Model as a first result of such an interdisciplinary cooperation.