Institutionella samtal – struktur, moral och rationalitet

Institutionella samtal – struktur, moral och rationalite

The meaning of 6.8: Numeracy and normality in health information talks

The ambiguities of risk which stem from its translation from epidemiological findings into clinical knowledge and practice and thus to lay experiences of health and illness is a clear dilemma. How are risks expressed statistically, or otherwise mathematically, to be interpreted and communicated within the discourse of medico-science, and how within the discourse of an individual's everyday life? An important tool in all risk discourses and in preventive practices such as health information is testing and test results. Test results--presented in mathematical terms as points on a scale, or as a number--are in fact fundamental to preventive practice. But what do we know about how people involved in these tests understand them and how the results are used in the construction of ideas about risk and normalcy? This article attempts to answer part of that question by drawing on an empirical study of the use of numbers as metaphors in talks between a nurse and her potential patients in a directed health survey.risk mathematical terms normality health information

Virtual talk as a communicative resource. Explorations in the field of gene technology.

In face-to-face conversation, participants often give the floor, or the voice, to non-present participants - virtual participants. These are made present in the conversation by actual speakers quoting them, voicing them or referring to their opinions. In this paper, we examine instances of such virtual talk. Data are drawn from focus group discussions and public meetings about genetically modified food. Our analyses demonstrate some of the dynamics inherent in the interaction between the speaker, the present participants and one or more virtual participants. We focus on the specific functions of virtual talk, suggesting that it is a communicative resource that can be used to solve a number of different communicative tasks

Comprendre la complexité : les focus groups comme espace de pensée et d’argumentation sur les aliments génétiquement modifiés

Dans cet article nous discutons des focus groups en tant que méthode d’exploration des représentations sociales. Notre étude porte sur les aliments, ou organismes, génétiquement modifiés (OGM). Les données de onze focus groups, organisés en Suède, ont étés soumises à une analyse de contenu thématique. Sont retenus les deux procédés rhétoriques utilisés par les participants. Pour comprendre le sujet nouveau, complexe et qui présente plusieurs facettes, les participants utilisent différentes analogies et distinctions. Souvent, les analogies et les distinctions se trouvent dans des séquences ou cycles. L'autre ressource argumentative discutée dans cet article est l’emploi de citations hypothétiques. Les participants utilisent les voix d’autres acteurs, souvent des acteurs collectifs (participants virtuels), ce qui rend compte de la polyvocalité (intérêts et points de vue différents) des représentations sociales.Wibeck Victoria, Adelswärd Viveka, Linell Per, Probs Isabelle. Comprendre la complexité : les focus groups comme espace de pensée et d’argumentation sur les aliments génétiquement modifiés. In: Bulletin de psychologie, tome 57 n°471, 2004. Les groupes centrés (focus groups) pp. 253-261