Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Discourse & Society
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Antaki, C.
Right arrow Articles by Rapley, M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

`Quality of Life' Talk: The Liberal Paradox of Psychological Testing

Charles Antaki

LOUGHBOROUGH UNIVERSITY

Mark Rapley

UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN QUEENSLAND

The new discourse of `quality of life' is highly consequential for those whose lives are regulated by medical and psychological services, but at the heart of it there is a paradox. On the one hand, psychologists are committed to assessing the wellbeing of their clients; on the other hand, their theorization of `quality of life' and their diagnostic interview procedures cordon off its official definition from ordinary usages. This paper explores how interviewers try to solve the paradox by `naturalizing' their questioning, in spite of interviewees' orientation to the clinical test that motivates it. We pay close attention to the actual practice of assessment interviews and show how troubles arise due to mismatches between the `natural' and the official in two crucial aspects: the motivation for asking about someone's quality of life and how to deal with the `irrelevant' material and troubles talk that the client might provide as an answer. We show how interviewers use cover identifications, pro-verbs and prodescriptions to solve the paradox they face. We conclude that whatever such interviews achieve, it is not so much a record of the respondent's quality of life but of the interviewer and interviewee's joint management of a paradoxical encounter.

Key Words: conversation analysis • institutional talk • interviews • naturalization • psychological testing • psy-complex • `quality of life' • troubles talk

Discourse & Society, Vol. 7, No. 3, 293-316 (1996)
DOI: 10.1177/0957926596007003002
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Discourse StudiesHome page
M. Bartesaghi
Conversation and psychotherapy: how questioning reveals institutional answers
Discourse Studies, April 1, 2009; 11(2): 153 - 177.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Qual Health ResHome page
D. Kelly
Changed Men: The Embodied Impact of Prostate Cancer
Qual Health Res, February 1, 2009; 19(2): 151 - 163.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Qualitative ResearchHome page
C. Puchta, J. Potter, and S. Wolff
Repeat receipts: a device for generating visible data in market research focus groups
Qualitative Research, December 1, 2004; 4(3): 285 - 309.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Qualitative ResearchHome page
T. J. Rapley
The art(fulness) of open-ended interviewing: some considerations on analysing interviews
Qualitative Research, December 1, 2001; 1(3): 303 - 323.
[Abstract] [PDF]