4.5 Article

GP laughter in lifestyle behaviour consultations: A conversation analytical study of general practice

期刊

PATIENT EDUCATION AND COUNSELING
卷 113, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.pec.2023.107769

关键词

General Practice; Lifestyle behaviour; Laughter; Consultation; Doctor -patient communication

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study examines the response of General Practitioners (GPs) to patient laughter in lifestyle behaviour consultations. The study finds that GPs reciprocate laughter when patients mention their behaviors and display evaluative stances. However, when patient laughter is in response to GP enquiries, laughter is usually not reciprocated.
Objective: This study investigates laughter by General Practitioners (GPs) in response to patient laughter in lifestyle behaviour consultations.Method: We examined video-recorded consultations involving 44 patients of four GPs in Australia. After identifying 33 cases of patient laughter, we examined whether GPs laughed in response. We used Conversation Analysis to explore the appropriateness of GP laughter and non-laughter by investigating the talk before and after the occurrence of patient laughter.Results: GP reciprocal laughter was found in thirteen occasions when patients unsolicitedly mentioned their behaviours, laughed and displayed their evaluative stances (whether the behaviours were positive or negative). On twenty occasions, patients laughed in response to GP enquiries, which worked to problematise particular behaviours. In this context, patient laughter was not usually reciprocated (19/20 cases) because reciprocal laughter may risk being interpreted as laughing at the patient, as evidenced by one deviant case.Conclusion: GP reciprocal laughter may be problematic when the behaviour issues are raised by GPs and patients' evaluative stances regarding their behaviour have not yet been revealed. Practice implications: To decide when it is appropriate to reciprocate laughter, GPs should consider the contexts that lead to patient laughter and patients' evaluative stances.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据