1887
Volume 12, Issue 3
  • ISSN 1878-9714
  • E-ISSN: 1878-9722
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

Using Conversation Analytic (CA) methods, the present study attempts to analyze the various functions of face-based therapist empathy, and how they are sequentially realized in different psychotherapeutic settings. Four types of face-based therapeutic functions are discussed; more specifically, it is illustrated how therapist empathy may serve to maintain, enhance, threaten or even save the client’s face. The findings gained could contribute to a better understanding of the face-based therapeutic functions of empathy; also, the study may inspire researchers to further investigate other functions of therapist empathy in psychotherapy.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/ps.18028.yij
2021-07-05
2021-12-04
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Alm, Maria
    2007Also darüber lässt sich ja streiten! Die Analyse von also in der Diskussion zu Diskurs-und Modalpartikeln. (‘So you can argue about this! The analysis of also in the discussion of discourse and modal particles’.) Stockholm: Almqvist and Wiksell International.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Antaki, Charles
    2008 “Formulations in psychotherapy”. InConversation Analysis and Psychotherapy, ed. byAnssi Peräkylä, Charles Antaki, Sanna Vehviläinen and Ivan Leudar, 26–42. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511490002.003
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511490002.003 [Google Scholar]
  3. 2011Applied Conversation Analysis: Intervention and Change in Institutional Talk. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. 10.1057/9780230316874
    https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230316874 [Google Scholar]
  4. Antaki, Charles, Rebecca Barnes, and Ivan Leudar
    2005 “Diagnostic Formulations in Psychotherapy.” Discourse Studies7 (6): 627–647. doi:  10.1177/1461445605055420
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445605055420 [Google Scholar]
  5. Arundale, Robert B.
    2006 “Face as Relational and Interactional: A Communication Framework for Research on Face, Facework, and Politeness.” Journal of Politeness Research2(2):193–216. doi:  10.1515/PR.2006.011
    https://doi.org/10.1515/PR.2006.011 [Google Scholar]
  6. 2010 “Constituting Face in Conversation: Face, Facework and Interactional Achievement.” Journal of Pragmatics42(8): 2078–2105. doi:  10.1016/j.pragma.2009.12.021
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2009.12.021 [Google Scholar]
  7. Barnett, Mark A.
    1984 “Similarity of experience and empathy in prescholars.” Journal of Genetic Psychology145 (2): 241–50. doi:  10.1080/00221325.1984.10532271
    https://doi.org/10.1080/00221325.1984.10532271 [Google Scholar]
  8. Bercelli, Fabrizio, Federico Rossano, and Maurizio Viaro
    2008 “Client’s responses to therapists’ reinterpretations” InConversation Analysis and Psychotherapy, ed. byAnssi Peräkylä, Charles Antaki, Sanna Vehviläinen and Ivan Leudar, 26–42. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511490002.004
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511490002.004 [Google Scholar]
  9. Brown, Penelope, and Stephen C. Levinson
    1987Politeness:Some Universals in Language Usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511813085
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511813085 [Google Scholar]
  10. Buttny, Richard
    1993Social Accountability in Communication. London: Sage.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. 1996 “Clients’ and Therapist’s Joint Construction of Clients’ Problems.” Research on Language and Social Interaction29 (2):125–153. doi:  10.1207/s15327973rlsi2902_2
    https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327973rlsi2902_2 [Google Scholar]
  12. Cruz, Manuel Padilla
    2008 “Phatic utterances as face-threatening/saving acts or politeness strategies: A pragmatic reflection for their teaching in the L2 class.” In25 Years of Applied Linguistics in Spain: Milestones and Challenges, ed. byRafael Monroy Casas and Aquilino Sánchez Perez, 799–804. Murcia: Edit.um.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Davidson, Judy
    1984 “Subsequent Versions of Invitations, Offers, Requests, and Proposals Dealing with Potential or Actual Rejection.” InStructures of Social Action, ed. byJ. Maxwell Atkinson and John Heritage, 102–128. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Eslami, Zohreh R., and Shuan Wei-Hong Ko
    2015 “Facework in Non-face Threatening Emails by Native and Non-native English Speakers.” Russian Journal of Linguistics4 (1):111–126.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Greenberg, Leslie S., Laura North Rice, and Robert K. Elliott
    1993Facilitating Emotional Change: The Moment by Moment Process. New York: Guilford Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Haugh, Michael
    2007 “The Co-constitution of Politeness Implicature in Conversation. Journal of Pragmatics39(1): 84–110. doi:  10.1016/j.pragma.2006.07.004
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2006.07.004 [Google Scholar]
  17. Harris, Sandra
    2003 “Politeness and Power: Making and Responding to Requests in Institutional Settings.” Text & Talk23 (1):27–52. doi:  10.1515/text.2003.003
    https://doi.org/10.1515/text.2003.003 [Google Scholar]
  18. Hepburn, Alexa, and Jonathan Potter
    2007 “Crying receipts: Time, empathy, and Institutional Practice.” Research on Language and Social Interaction40 (1): 89–116. doi:  10.1080/08351810701331299
    https://doi.org/10.1080/08351810701331299 [Google Scholar]
  19. Heritage, John, and Marja-Leena Sorjonen
    1994 “Constituting and Maintaining Activities across Sequences: And-prefacing as a Feature of Question Design.” Language in Society23 (1):1–29. doi:  10.1017/S0047404500017656
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404500017656 [Google Scholar]
  20. Heritage, John and D. Rod Watson
    1980 “Formulations as Conversational Objects.” InEveryday Language: Studies in Ethnomethodology, ed. byGeorge Psathas, 123–162. New York: Irvington Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Hoffman, Martin L.
    2000Empathy and Moral Development: Implications for Caring and Justice. New York: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511805851
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511805851 [Google Scholar]
  22. Jefferson, Gail
    2004 “Glossary of Transcript Symbols with an Introduction.” InConversation Analysis: Studies From the First Generation, ed. byLerner, Gene H., 13–31. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. doi:  10.1075/pbns.125.02jef
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.125.02jef [Google Scholar]
  23. Kalisch, Beatrice J.
    1973 “What is Empathy?” American Journal of Nursing73 (9):1548–1552. doi:  10.2307/3422614
    https://doi.org/10.2307/3422614 [Google Scholar]
  24. Kasper, Gabriele
    2009 “Politeness.” InThe Pragmatics of Interaction, ed. bySigurd D’hond, Jan-Ola Ӧstman, and Jef Verschueren, 157–173. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/hoph.4.09kas
    https://doi.org/10.1075/hoph.4.09kas [Google Scholar]
  25. Makoul, Gregory
    1998 “Communication Research in Medical Education.” InHealth Communication Research: A Guide to Developments and Directions, ed. byLorraine D. Jackson and Bernard K. Duffy. 17–35. Westport, Conn.: Greenwood Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Marcus, Stroe
    1997Empatie si personalitate. Bucuresti: Editura Atos.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Miller, Gerald R., and Mark Steinberg
    1975Between People: A New Analysis of Interpersonal Communication. Chicago: Science Research Associates.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Paivio, Sandra C. and Christine Laurent
    2001 “Empathy and Emotion Regulation: Reprocessing Memories of Childhood Abuse.” Journal of Clinical Psychology57(2): 213–226. doi:  10.1002/1097‑4679(200102)57:2<213::AID‑JCLP7>3.0.CO;2‑B
    https://doi.org/10.1002/1097-4679(200102)57:2<213::AID-JCLP7>3.0.CO;2-B [Google Scholar]
  29. Peräkylä, Anssi
    2005 “Patients’ Responses to Interpretations: A Dialogue Between Conversation Analysis and Psychoanalytic Theory.” Communication & Medicine2 (2):163–176. doi:  10.1515/come.2005.2.2.163
    https://doi.org/10.1515/come.2005.2.2.163 [Google Scholar]
  30. 2011 “After Interpretation: Third-Position Utterances in Psychoanalysis.” Research on Language and Social Interaction44 (3):288–316. doi: 10.1080/08351813.2011.591968
    https://doi.org/10.1080/08351813.2011.591968 [Google Scholar]
  31. Peräkylä, Anssi, Charles Antaki, Sanna Vehviläinen, and Ivan Leudar
    2008Conversation Analysis and Psychotherapy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511490002
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511490002 [Google Scholar]
  32. Peräkylä, Anssi, and David Silverman
    1991 “Reinterpreting Speech-exchange Systems: Communication Forms in Aids Counselling.” Sociology25 (4):627–651. doi:  10.1177/0038038591025004005
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0038038591025004005 [Google Scholar]
  33. Pierce, Richard M., and Thomas H. Zar1e
    1972 “Differential Referral to a Significant Other as a Function of Interpersonal Effectiveness.” Journal of Clinical Psychology28 (3): 230–232. doi:  10.1002/1097‑4679(197204)28:2<230::AID‑JCLP2270280234>3.0.CO;2‑9
    https://doi.org/10.1002/1097-4679(197204)28:2<230::AID-JCLP2270280234>3.0.CO;2-9 [Google Scholar]
  34. Rogers, Carl R.
    1957 “The Necessary and Sufficient Conditions of Therapeutic Personality Change.” Journal of Consulting Psychology21 (2):95–103. doi:  10.1037/h0045357
    https://doi.org/10.1037/h0045357 [Google Scholar]
  35. Ruusuvuori, Johanna
    2005 “‘Empathy’ and ‘Sympathy’ in Action: Attending to Patients’ Troubles in Finnish Homeopathic and General Practice Consultations.” Social Psychology Quarterly68 (3):204–222. doi:  10.1177/019027250506800302
    https://doi.org/10.1177/019027250506800302 [Google Scholar]
  36. 2007 “Managing Affect: Integration of Empathy and Problem-solving in Health Care Encounters.” Discourse Studies9 (5):597–622. doi:  10.1177/1461445607081269
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445607081269 [Google Scholar]
  37. Sacks, Harvey, Emanuel A. Schegloff and Gail Jefferson
    1974 “A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation.” Language50 (1): 696–735. doi:  10.1353/lan.1974.0010
    https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.1974.0010 [Google Scholar]
  38. Salwa, Salwa
    2012 “The Use of Indirect Speech as a Face-saving Act in Anglo-Saxon Cultural Values.” Language, Discourse and Society2 (1): 43–51.
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Schegloff, Emanuel A.
    1968 “Sequencing in Conversational Openings.” American Anthropologist70 (6):1075–1095. doi:  10.1525/aa.1968.70.6.02a00030
    https://doi.org/10.1525/aa.1968.70.6.02a00030 [Google Scholar]
  40. Taylor, Charlotte
    2012 “Negative Politeness Forms and Impoliteness Functions in Institutional Discourse: A Corpus-assisted Approach.” InSituated Politeness, ed. byBethan Davies, Michael Haugh and Andrew John Merrison, 209–231. London: Continuum.
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Voutilainen, Liisa
    2010 “Emotional Experience in Psychotherapeutic Interaction-Conversation Analytical Study on Cognitive Psychotherapy.” University of HelsinkiPh.D. dissertation.
    [Google Scholar]
  42. 2012 “Responding to Emotion in Cognitive Psychotherapy.” InEmotion in Interaction, ed. byAnssi Peräkylä and Marja-Leena Sorjonen, 235–255. Oxford: Oxford University Press. doi:  10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199730735.003.0011
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199730735.003.0011 [Google Scholar]
  43. Watson, Jeanee C.
    2002 “Re-visioning empathy.” InHumanistic Pyschotherapies: Handbook of Research and Practice, ed. byDavid J. Cain and Jules Seeman, 445–471. London: Springer. 10.1037/10439‑014
    https://doi.org/10.1037/10439-014 [Google Scholar]
  44. Watson, Jeanee C. and Shari M. Geller
    2005 “The Relation among the Relationship Conditions, Working Alliance, and Outcome in both Process-experiential and Cognitive-behavioral Psychotherapy.” Psychotherapy Research15 (12):25–33. 10.1080/10503300512331327010
    https://doi.org/10.1080/10503300512331327010 [Google Scholar]
  45. Watson, Jeanee C., Rhonda Goldman, and Greet Vanaerschot
    1998 “Empathic: A Post Modern Way of Being.” InThe Handbook of Experiential Psychotherapy, ed. byLeslie S. Greenberg, Jeanee C. Watson and Germain Lietaer, 61–81. New York: Guilford.
    [Google Scholar]
  46. Weiste, Elina
    2018 “Relational interaction in occupational therapy: Conversation Analysis of Positive Feedback.” Scandinavian Journal of Occupational Therapy25 (1):44–51. doi:  10.1080/11038128.2017.1282040
    https://doi.org/10.1080/11038128.2017.1282040 [Google Scholar]
  47. Wilce, James M.
    2009Language and Emotion. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  48. Wilkinson, Sue, and Celia Kitzinger
    2006 “Surprise as Interactional Achievement: Reaction Tokens in Conversation.” Social Psychology Quarterly69 (2):150–182. doi:  10.1177/019027250606900203
    https://doi.org/10.1177/019027250606900203 [Google Scholar]
  49. Zajdman, Anat
    1995 “Humorous Face-threatening Acts: Humor as Strategy.” Journal of Pragmatics23(3):325–339. doi:  10.1016/0378‑2166(94)00038‑G
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(94)00038-G [Google Scholar]
  50. Zhu, Weihua
    2014 “Rapport Management in Strong Disagreement: An Investigation of a Community of Chinese Speakers of English.” Text & Talk34 (5): 641–664. doi:  10.1515/text‑2014‑0021
    https://doi.org/10.1515/text-2014-0021 [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/ps.18028.yij
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/ps.18028.yij
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): conversation analysis; empathy; facework; psychotherapy; therapist-client interaction
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error