Repair, or conversational repair, frequently appears in court proceedings as a vital mechanism sustaining effective communication. Our study presents a conversational analysis of the choices of different operations in the same-turn self-repair and shows how judges, plaintiffs, defendants, and their lawyers deploy those operations based on a model of epistemic stance. The data were drawn from the top five most-viewed videos of Changsha civil courtrooms from March to May, 2019, totaling more than 50,000 words. In the courtroom interaction, replacing and inserting are the most frequently used operations for all participants. In the courtroom cross-examinations, interlocutors use discrepant same-turn self-repair operations to achieve single or multiple communicative goals, such as improving precision, increasing credibility, highlighting their points, skirting questions, and confirming information. Additionally, when the epistemic stance of the trouble source is [K+], speakers employ most same-turn self-repair operations to keep their [K+] epistemic stance by improving precision and increasing credibility of their utterances or use reformatting or inserting to downgrade epistemic stance to [K-] by decreasing the certainty of their utterances. These findings shed light on the understanding of same-turn self-repairs in the institutional interaction, particularly in Chinese civil courtroom interaction.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10762541 | PMC |
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1285759 | DOI Listing |
J Ethn Migr Stud
August 2024
Institute of Sociology and Cultural Organisation (ISCO), Leuphana University of Lüneburg, Lüneburg, Germany.
State authorities in Europe invest immense resources in what the EU insists on calling the 'fight against illegal migration'. Based on ethnographic research in two German cities, this paper shows that a tough approach towards illegalised migration can only be implemented through state practices that operate at the margins of, or even cross, the boundaries of what is legally permissible. This argument is developed through an analysis of informal practices that frontline staff in registry offices and migration administrations deploy to prevent, or at least disturb, illegalised migrants' attempts to regularise their status by becoming the parent of child that is entitled to German citizenship.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFJ Psychiatr Res
January 2025
Research Department of Clinical, Educational and Health Psychology, University College London, London, United Kingdom; Anna Freud National Centre for Children and Families, London, United Kingdom.
Background: The present study examines the interplay between epistemic stance, attachment dimensions, and childhood trauma in relation to specific demographic factors and mental health outcomes. This study aims to understand how these factors form distinct profiles among individuals, to identify those at risk of mental health concerns.
Method: Latent Profile Analysis (LPA) was employed on a dataset from the general population (n = 500) to identify subgroups of individuals based on their epistemic stance (mistrust and credulity), attachment dimensions, and childhood trauma.
J Affect Disord
March 2025
Research Department of Clinical, Educational and Health Psychology, University College London, London, United Kingdom; Anna Freud National Centre for Children and Families, London, United Kingdom.
Background: Emotion regulation is a crucial function implicated in multiple mental health disorders; understanding the mechanisms by which emotion regulation has such impact is essential. Mentalizing has been posited as a prerequisite for effective emotion regulation. The current study aims to examine the roles of epistemic trust and interpersonal problems in driving the association between mentalizing and emotion regulation, contrasting clinical and non-clinical populations.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFEpistemic trust-trust in the relevance and utility of social learning-is central to helping processes between clients and workers in helping services. Yet, due to their experiences, clients may develop predispositions toward stances of epistemic mistrust or epistemic credulity. From an AMBIT (adaptive mentalization-based integrative treatment) perspective, this article argues that epistemic mistrust and credulity are both social injustice and further social injustice.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFPsychodyn Psychiatry
December 2024
Research Department of Clinical, Educational and Health Psychology, University College, London, UK; The Anna Freud Centre, London, UK.
This article reviews an approach to working with families that grounds in systemic thinking the framework of mentalization-based treatment. Employing a mentalizing stance, this approach aims to interrupt coercive, nonmentalizing cycles of interaction within the family system and replace them with mentalizing conversations in which epistemic trust and the shared social-emotional learning of the we-mode can be generated. The process thus promoted is a spiral of shared attention and co-mentalizing, constantly lost and then recovered, in which therapist and family members learn to hear, recognize, understand, and trust one another and repair the inevitable disruptions in mentalizing and trust that allow family members to experience a way of shared knowing- the we-mode-that they can apply to communicate and solve problems both within the family system and in the broader social systems in which the family is embedded.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFEnter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!