ON NEW ROLES IN DIGITAL ENVIRONMENTS: E-DOCTORS AND E-PATIENTS

Research output: Other contribution

Abstract

Medical communication can be both a dialogue between expert-to-expert or expert-to-laymen(Cordella, 2004; Bowles, 2006; Candlin, 2006; Maynard and Hudak 2008; Lutfey and Maynard 1998;Heritage 2010; Heritage and Clayman, 2010 among others). In this last exchange, the doctor treats thepatient as an ‘understanding recipient of medical reasoning’ (Peräkylä 1997) and language is simplifiedfor communicative reasons (Koch-Weser et al., 2009). Patients are assumed as having little medicalknowledge, which affects their understanding of medical terms and eventually leads to poorcommunication and to patients’ dissatisfaction (Candlin, Bruton and Leather, 1974; Coulthard andAshby, 1975; Todd and Fisher, 1993; Bertakis, Roter and Putman 1991). However research on data takenfrom online message boards proves that e-patients are comfortable users of a highly specialized medicalterminology and are thus construed as health literates (Jensen, Fage-Butler, 2014).It is questioned whether this new expertise modifies the quality of doctor-patient exchanges in onlinequestion/answer format frames. It is also asked whether doctors are still ‘silent listeners’ (Ribeiro, 2002) andexpert translators of personal emotions and subjective realities (Guido, 2006). In particular the studyinvestigates if e-doctors follow the socio-relational approach or, on the contrary, they use a more directbiomedical approach and if posts maintain the asymmetrical relationship which favours the doctor (likein face-to-face ‘traditional’ exchanges) or if the approach is imposed by the literate e-patient’s question.Analysing data by means of discourse analysis, it is further questioned whether cultural differences arefound in sites directed to Italian speakers and English speakers.
Original languageEnglish
Publication statusPublished - 2014

Fingerprint

expert
translator
listener
cultural difference
discourse analysis
expertise
emotion
recipient
dialogue
communication
language
health

Cite this

@misc{1bee20fe1a4b460fbc03a1b07997798b,
title = "ON NEW ROLES IN DIGITAL ENVIRONMENTS: E-DOCTORS AND E-PATIENTS",
abstract = "Medical communication can be both a dialogue between expert-to-expert or expert-to-laymen(Cordella, 2004; Bowles, 2006; Candlin, 2006; Maynard and Hudak 2008; Lutfey and Maynard 1998;Heritage 2010; Heritage and Clayman, 2010 among others). In this last exchange, the doctor treats thepatient as an ‘understanding recipient of medical reasoning’ (Per{\"a}kyl{\"a} 1997) and language is simplifiedfor communicative reasons (Koch-Weser et al., 2009). Patients are assumed as having little medicalknowledge, which affects their understanding of medical terms and eventually leads to poorcommunication and to patients’ dissatisfaction (Candlin, Bruton and Leather, 1974; Coulthard andAshby, 1975; Todd and Fisher, 1993; Bertakis, Roter and Putman 1991). However research on data takenfrom online message boards proves that e-patients are comfortable users of a highly specialized medicalterminology and are thus construed as health literates (Jensen, Fage-Butler, 2014).It is questioned whether this new expertise modifies the quality of doctor-patient exchanges in onlinequestion/answer format frames. It is also asked whether doctors are still ‘silent listeners’ (Ribeiro, 2002) andexpert translators of personal emotions and subjective realities (Guido, 2006). In particular the studyinvestigates if e-doctors follow the socio-relational approach or, on the contrary, they use a more directbiomedical approach and if posts maintain the asymmetrical relationship which favours the doctor (likein face-to-face ‘traditional’ exchanges) or if the approach is imposed by the literate e-patient’s question.Analysing data by means of discourse analysis, it is further questioned whether cultural differences arefound in sites directed to Italian speakers and English speakers.",
author = "Zummo, {Marianna Lya}",
year = "2014",
language = "English",
type = "Other",

}

TY - GEN

T1 - ON NEW ROLES IN DIGITAL ENVIRONMENTS: E-DOCTORS AND E-PATIENTS

AU - Zummo, Marianna Lya

PY - 2014

Y1 - 2014

N2 - Medical communication can be both a dialogue between expert-to-expert or expert-to-laymen(Cordella, 2004; Bowles, 2006; Candlin, 2006; Maynard and Hudak 2008; Lutfey and Maynard 1998;Heritage 2010; Heritage and Clayman, 2010 among others). In this last exchange, the doctor treats thepatient as an ‘understanding recipient of medical reasoning’ (Peräkylä 1997) and language is simplifiedfor communicative reasons (Koch-Weser et al., 2009). Patients are assumed as having little medicalknowledge, which affects their understanding of medical terms and eventually leads to poorcommunication and to patients’ dissatisfaction (Candlin, Bruton and Leather, 1974; Coulthard andAshby, 1975; Todd and Fisher, 1993; Bertakis, Roter and Putman 1991). However research on data takenfrom online message boards proves that e-patients are comfortable users of a highly specialized medicalterminology and are thus construed as health literates (Jensen, Fage-Butler, 2014).It is questioned whether this new expertise modifies the quality of doctor-patient exchanges in onlinequestion/answer format frames. It is also asked whether doctors are still ‘silent listeners’ (Ribeiro, 2002) andexpert translators of personal emotions and subjective realities (Guido, 2006). In particular the studyinvestigates if e-doctors follow the socio-relational approach or, on the contrary, they use a more directbiomedical approach and if posts maintain the asymmetrical relationship which favours the doctor (likein face-to-face ‘traditional’ exchanges) or if the approach is imposed by the literate e-patient’s question.Analysing data by means of discourse analysis, it is further questioned whether cultural differences arefound in sites directed to Italian speakers and English speakers.

AB - Medical communication can be both a dialogue between expert-to-expert or expert-to-laymen(Cordella, 2004; Bowles, 2006; Candlin, 2006; Maynard and Hudak 2008; Lutfey and Maynard 1998;Heritage 2010; Heritage and Clayman, 2010 among others). In this last exchange, the doctor treats thepatient as an ‘understanding recipient of medical reasoning’ (Peräkylä 1997) and language is simplifiedfor communicative reasons (Koch-Weser et al., 2009). Patients are assumed as having little medicalknowledge, which affects their understanding of medical terms and eventually leads to poorcommunication and to patients’ dissatisfaction (Candlin, Bruton and Leather, 1974; Coulthard andAshby, 1975; Todd and Fisher, 1993; Bertakis, Roter and Putman 1991). However research on data takenfrom online message boards proves that e-patients are comfortable users of a highly specialized medicalterminology and are thus construed as health literates (Jensen, Fage-Butler, 2014).It is questioned whether this new expertise modifies the quality of doctor-patient exchanges in onlinequestion/answer format frames. It is also asked whether doctors are still ‘silent listeners’ (Ribeiro, 2002) andexpert translators of personal emotions and subjective realities (Guido, 2006). In particular the studyinvestigates if e-doctors follow the socio-relational approach or, on the contrary, they use a more directbiomedical approach and if posts maintain the asymmetrical relationship which favours the doctor (likein face-to-face ‘traditional’ exchanges) or if the approach is imposed by the literate e-patient’s question.Analysing data by means of discourse analysis, it is further questioned whether cultural differences arefound in sites directed to Italian speakers and English speakers.

UR - http://hdl.handle.net/10447/99105

UR - http://www.languagingdiversity2014.unict.it/sites/default/files/files/Book%20of%20abstracts.pdf

M3 - Other contribution

ER -