Harrigan J A, Heidotting T, Fox K
Department of Psychology, California State University, Fullerton.
Fam Pract Res J. 1990 Spring-Summer;9(2):131-45.
This study was designed to analyze communication patterns between older patients and physicians by an in-depth examination of linguistic aspects of the interactions, including utterance form, process, and content variables. Sixteen family medicine residents were videotaped individually interviewing one of four simulated female patients. Verbal behavior was analyzed in detail using categories from linguistic studies. Residents were divided into High and Low Information groups. Significant differences in interviewing style were found between groups in categories of: Closed (High = 62.25, Low = 35.88), Compound (High = 11.63, Low = 2.00), and Reflective (High = 20.13, Low = 10.13) Questions; Direct (High = 33.50, Low = 25.00) and Positive (High = 9.25, Low = 3.88) Answers; Added Information (High = 15.75; Low = 9.38); Listener Responses (High = 57.38, Low = 41.50); and Appropriate Turn-Taking (High = 66.63, Low = 48.38). There seems to be a clear difference between what is taught in medical schools about interviewing and the interviewing techniques used by residents in the actual practice of medicine. High information doctors combined a style of closed and combined questions with considerable facilitation and respect for the patient.
本研究旨在通过深入考察互动中的语言方面,包括话语形式、过程和内容变量,来分析老年患者与医生之间的沟通模式。16名家庭医学住院医师分别对4名模拟女性患者之一进行了录像访谈。使用语言学研究的类别对言语行为进行了详细分析。住院医师被分为高信息组和低信息组。在以下类别中发现两组在访谈风格上存在显著差异:封闭式问题(高信息组 = 62.25,低信息组 = 35.88)、复合式问题(高信息组 = 11.63,低信息组 = 2.00)和反思性问题(高信息组 = 20.13,低信息组 = 10.13);直接回答(高信息组 = 33.50,低信息组 = 25.00)和肯定回答(高信息组 = 9.25,低信息组 = 3.88);补充信息(高信息组 = 15.75;低信息组 = 9.38);倾听者回应(高信息组 = 57.38,低信息组 = 41.50);以及适当的轮流发言(高信息组 = 66.63,低信息组 = 48.38)。医学院校所教授的访谈内容与住院医师在实际医疗实践中使用的访谈技巧之间似乎存在明显差异。高信息医生将封闭式和复合式问题的风格与对患者的充分引导和尊重相结合。