Suppr超能文献

“我不敢自称是世界顶尖专家,但……”:个人如何“知道”家庭成员所声称的健康问题并不像他们说的那么严重。

"I Don't Claim to Be the World's Foremost Expert, But . . . ": How Individuals "Know" Family Members Are Not Experiencing Health Issues as Severely as They Claim.

机构信息

1 University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, IL, USA.

2 Rollins College, Winter Park, Florida, USA.

出版信息

Qual Health Res. 2019 Aug;29(10):1433-1446. doi: 10.1177/1049732319827518. Epub 2019 Feb 14.

Abstract

To understand how individuals come to "know" that their family members are not experiencing their health issues as severely as they claim, we interviewed 32 individuals (nine men and 23 women, age = 35.28 years, = 9.91 years) about a family member who they believe falsifies or exaggerates his or her health condition(s). Our analyses illuminate two interlinked processes of knowledge construction: (a) developing evidentiary standards and (b) gathering evidence. In engaging these processes, participants sought two types of consistency: correspondence with external "facts" (e.g., medical information, cultural [mis]conceptions), and internal coherence (i.e., complaints were highly self-contradictory and unpredictable or were overly predictable). When initial inconsistencies made participants doubt their family member, participants gathered additional evidence, including experiential, behavioral, and interactional evidence, to test and revise their initial suspicions. We discuss the implications of this research for theory and for families coping with illness.

摘要

为了理解个体如何“知道”他们的家庭成员没有像他们声称的那样严重地经历健康问题,我们采访了 32 个人(9 名男性和 23 名女性,年龄=35.28 岁,=9.91 岁),他们的家庭成员他们认为伪造或夸大了他或她的健康状况。我们的分析阐明了知识构建的两个相互关联的过程:(a)制定证据标准和(b)收集证据。在参与这些过程时,参与者寻求两种类型的一致性:与外部“事实”(例如,医疗信息、文化[误解])的一致性,以及内部连贯性(即,抱怨非常自相矛盾且不可预测,或者过于可预测)。当最初的不一致使参与者怀疑他们的家庭成员时,参与者收集了额外的证据,包括经验、行为和互动证据,以检验和修正他们最初的怀疑。我们讨论了这项研究对理论和应对疾病的家庭的影响。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验