School of Social, Political and Geographical Sciences, Loughborough University, Loughborough, UK.
J Intellect Disabil Res. 2013 Jun;57(6):580-8. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2788.2012.01572.x. Epub 2012 May 4.
Staff can encourage adults with intellectual disabilities to reflect on their experiences in a number of ways. Not all are equally successful interactionally.
Conversation Analysis is used to examine c. 30 h of recordings made at two service-provider agencies.
I identify two practices for soliciting reflection: both start with open-ended 'test' questions, but they differ on how these are followed up. A more interrogatory practice is to follow up with alternatives and yes/no questions. A more facilitative practice is to give hints and elaborate the replies.
I discuss the differences between the two practices in terms of the institutional agendas that guide the staff's interactional routines. With regard to the more successful one, I note the sensitivity of using 'hints' when asking about clients' own experiences.
工作人员可以通过多种方式鼓励成年智障人士反思他们的经历,但并非所有方式在互动方面都同样成功。
本文使用会话分析的方法来研究两个服务提供商机构录制的约 30 小时的记录。
我确定了两种征求反思的实践方法:它们都以开放式的“测试”问题开始,但后续方式有所不同。一种更具审问性质的方法是通过提供选择和是/否问题来跟进。一种更具促进性质的方法是给出提示并详细说明回答。
我根据指导工作人员互动常规的机构议程讨论了这两种实践方法之间的差异。对于更成功的一种方法,我注意到在询问客户自身经历时使用“提示”的敏感性。