Cover not available
Part of
Communicating Certainty and Uncertainty in Medical, Supportive and Scientific Contexts
Edited by Andrzej Zuczkowski, Ramona Bongelli, Ilaria Riccioni and Carla Canestrari
[Dialogue Studies 25] 2014
► pp. 249–271

The fabric of certainty

Ignoring interactional details as an epistemic resource in research interviews

| University of Bologna, Italy
This chapter concerns the tactic of “ignoring uncertainty” that takes place during research interviewing. Drawing on extent research on research interviews as an interactive phenomenon, we contend that most micro-actions implied in scientific practices are purifying activities aimed to clean discursive data from uncertainty-marks and relativization cues. By analysing a collection of question/answer sequences from a telephone survey, we shows how the interviewer-in-the-field and the analyst-at-the-desk ignore these uncertainty markers as much as possible and turn almost every utterance into a declarative statement. We contend that these techniques of knowledge produce one of the culturally relevant traits of scientific knowledge: certainty. They therefore serve the purpose of nourishing our enduring positivistic vision of (scientific) knowledge as a mirror of reality.
Published online: 26 November 2014
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/ds.25.12car
References (66)
References
Aakhus, Mark. 2007. “Communication as Design.” Communication Monographs 74 (1): 112–117. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Antaki, Charles. 2002. “Personalized Revision of ‘Failed’ Questions.” Discourse Studies 4 (4): 411–428.Google Scholar
. 2006. “Producing a ‘Cognition’.” Discourse Studies 8 (1): 9–15. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Atkinson, Maxwell J., and John Heritage. 1984. “Preference Organization.” In Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversational Analysis, ed. by J. Maxwell Atkinson, and John 
Heritage, 53–56. Cambridge, MA.: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bailey, Kenneth D. 1978. Methods of Social Research. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Bolden, Galina B. 2009. “Beyond Answering: Repeat-Prefaced Responses in Conversation.” Communication Monographs 76 (2): 121–143. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Boyd, Elisabeth, and John Heritage. 2006. “Taking the Patient’s Medical History: Questioning during Comprehensive History Taking.” In Communication in Medical Care: Interactions Between Primary Care Physicians and Patients, ed. by John Heritage, and Douglas W. 
Maynard, 151–184. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brenner, Michael. 1981. “Aspects of Conversational Structure in the Research Interview.” In Conversation and Discourse: Structure and Interpretation, ed. by Paul Werth, 19–40. 
London: Croom Helm.Google Scholar
. 1982. “Response Effects of the ‘Role-restricted’ Characteristics of the Interviewer.” In Response Behaviour in the Survey Interview, ed. by Wil Dijkstra, and Johannes Van der Zouwen, 131–165. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
. 1985. “Survey Interviewing.” In The Research Interview: Uses and Approaches, ed. by Michael Brenner, Jennifer Brown, and David Cantor, 9–36. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Briggs, Charles. 1986. Learning How to Ask. A Sociolinguistic Appraisal of the Role of Interview in Social Science Research. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Caron, André, Jennie M. Hwang, Boris H.J.M. Brummans, and Letizia Caronia. 2013. “Business Writing on the Go: How Executives Manage Impressions Through E-mail Communication in Everyday Work Life.” Corporate Communication: An International Journal 18 (1): 8–25. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Caronia, Letizia. 1997. Costruire la conoscenza. Interazione e interpretazione nella ricerca sul campo in educazione [Constructing knowledge. Interaction and interpretation in educational field research]. Firenze: La Nuova Italia.Google Scholar
. 2011. “Representing Dialogues-in-the-field: The Shared Responsibility of Scientific Aesthetics.” Language and Dialogue 1 (2): 293–313. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Clayman, Steven, E. 1993. “Reformulating the Question: A Device for Answering/Not Answering Questions in News Interviews and Press Conferences.” Text 13: 59–188.Google Scholar
Cooren, François. 2010. Action and Agency in Dialogue: Passion, Incarnation, and Ventriloquism. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
De Caro, Mario, and Maurizio Ferraris. 2012. Bentornata realtà: il nuovo realismo in discussione [Wellcome back reality: discussing new realism]. Einaudi: Torino.Google Scholar
Dore, John, and Robert McDermot. 1982. “Linguistic Indeterminacy and Social Context in Utterance Interpretation.” Language 58: 374–398. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Drew, Paul. 2003. “Comparative Analysis of Talk-in-interaction in Different Institutional Settings: A Sketch.” In Studies in Language and Social Interaction: In Honor of Robert Hopper, ed. by Philip Glenn, Curtis D. Lebaron, and Jennifer Mandelbaum, 293–307. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Drew, Paul, and John Heritage (eds). 1992. Talk at Work. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
DuBois, John W. 2007. “The Stance Triangle.” In Stancetaking in Discourse: Subjectivity, Evaluation, Interaction, ed. by Robert Englebretson, 139–182. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fiske, Don W., and Richard A. Shweder (eds). 1986. Metatheory in Social Science: Pluralisms and Subjectivities. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Garfinkel, Harold. 1967. Studies in Ethnomethodology. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
Garfinkel, Harold, and Harvey Sacks. 1970. “On Formal Structures of Practical Action.” In Theoretical Sociology: Perspectives and Development, ed. by John C. McKinney, and Edward A. Tiryakian, 338–366. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.Google Scholar
Gergen, Kenneth, and Mary H. Gergen. 1991. “From Theory to Reflexivity in Research Practice.” In Method and Reflexivity: Knowing as Systemic Social Construction, ed. by Frederic Steier, 76–95. London, United Kingdom: Sage.Google Scholar
Glenn, Philip. 2011. “Formulation Sequences in Mediation: The Storytelling Stage.” Paper presented at the International Communication Association Conference, Boston, May 2011.
Heritage, John. 1985. “Analyzing News Interviews: Aspects of the Production of Talk for an Overhearing Audience.” In Handbook of Discourse Analysis. Vol.3: Discourse and Dialogue, ed. by Teun A. van Dijk, 95–117. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
. 1998. “Oh-prefaced Responses to Inquiry.” Language in Society 27: 291–334. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2003. “Designing Questions and Setting Agendas in the News Interview.” In Studies in Language and Social Interaction: In Honor of Robert Hopper, ed. by Philip Glenn, Curtis D. Lebaron, and Jennifer Mandelbaum, 57–90. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
. 2011. “A Galilean Moment in Social Theory? Language, Culture and their Emergent Properties.” Qualitative Sociology 34: 263–270. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heritage, John, and Geoffrey Raymond. 2005. “The Terms of Agreement: Indexing Epistemic Authority and Subordination in Talk-in-interaction.” Social Psychology Quarterly 68: 15–38. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heritage, John, and Rodney D. Watson. 1979. “Formulations as Conversational Objects.” In Everyday Language; Studies in Ethnomethodology, ed. by George Psathas, 123–162. New York: Irvington.Google Scholar
Houtkoop-Steenstra, Hanneke. 2000. Interaction and the Standardized Survey Interview: The Living Questionnaire. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hyman, Herbert H., William J. Cobb, Jacob J. Feldman, Clyde W. Hart, and Charles H. Stember. 1954/1975. Interviewing in Social Research 2nd ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Iversen, Clara. 2012. “Recordability: Resistance and Collusion in Psychometric Interviews with Children.” Discourse Studies 14 (6): 691–709. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kvale, Steinar, and Svend Brinkmann. 2009. InterViews: Learning the Craft of Qualitative Research Interviewing. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Latour, Bruno. 1999. Pandora’s Hope. Essays on the Reality of Science Studies. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Lynch, Michael. 1993. Scientific Practice and Ordinary Action: Ethnomethodology and Social Studies of Science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Maynard, Douglas W., Hanneke Houtkoop-Steenstra, Johannes van der Zouwen, and Nora Cate Schaeffer (eds.). 2002. Standardization and Tacit Knowledge: Interaction and Practice in the Survey Interview. New York: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
Maynard, Douglas W., and Nora Cate Schaeffer. 2002. “Standardization and Interaction in the Survey Interview.” Handbook of Interview Research: Context and Method, ed. by Jaber F. Gubrium, and James A. Holstein, 577–602. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Maynard, Douglas W., and Nora C. Schaeffer. 2006. “Standardization-in-interaction: The Survey Interview.” In Talk and Interaction in Social Research Methods, ed. by Paul Drew, 
Geoffrey Raymond, and Darin Weinberg, 9–27. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Mishler, Elliot. 1986. Research Interviewing: Context and Narrative. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Moerman, Michael. 1988. Talking Culture: Ethnography and Conversation Analysis. Philadelphia, Penn.: University of Pennsylvania Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pomerantz, Anita. 1984. “Pursuing a Response.” In Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversational Analysis, ed. by J. Maxwell Atkinson, and John Heritage, 152–163. Cambridge, MA.: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
. 1988. “Offering a Candidate Answer.” Communication Monographs, 55: 360–373. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Potter, Jonathan, and Alexa Hepburn. 2005. “Qualitative Interviews in Psychology: Problems and Possibilities.” Qualitative Research in Psychology 2 (4): 281–307. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2012. “Eight Challenges for Interview Researchers.” In Handbook of Interview Research (2nd ed.), ed. byJaber F. Gubrium, and James A. Holstein, 555–570. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Potter, Jonathan, and Margaret Wetherell. 1987. Discourse and Social Psychology: Beyond Attitudes and Behaviour. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Rabinow, Paul, and William M. Sullivan (eds.). 1987. Interpretive Social Science. A Second Look. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Raymond, Geoffrey. 2003. “Grammar and Social Organization: Yes/No Type Interrogatives and the Structure of Responding.” American Sociological Review 68: 939–967. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2006. “Questions at Work: Yes/No Type Interrogatives in Institutional Contexts.” In Talk and Interaction in Social Research Methods, ed. by Paul Drew, Geoffrey Raymond, and Darin Weinberg, 115–134. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Sacks, Harvey. 1984. “Notes on Methodology.” In Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis, ed. by J. Maxwell Atkinson, and John Heritage, 21–27. Cambridge: 
Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Sacks, Harvey, Emanuel Schegloff, and Gail Jefferson. 1974. “A Simplest Systematics for the Organization of Turn-taking for Conversation.” Language 50: 696–735. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schaeffer, Nora C., and Douglas W. Maynard. 2005. “From Paradigm to Prototype and Back Again: Interactive Aspects of “Cognitive Processing” in Standardized Survey Interviews.” In Conversation and Cognition, ed. by Hedwig te Molder, and Jonathan Potter, 114–133. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schegloff, Emanuel. 1968. “The Routine as Achievement.” Human Studies 9: 111–151. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1972. “Notes on a Conversational Practice: Formulating Place.” In Studies in Social Interaction, ed. by David Sudnow, 75–119. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
. 1987. “Between Micro and Macro: Context and Other Connections.” In The Micro-Macro Link, ed. by Jeffrey Alexander, Bernard Giessen, Richard Munch, and Neil Smelser, 207–234. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.Google Scholar
. 2007. Sequence Organization in Interaction: A Primer in Conversation Analysis. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schegloff, Emanuel, Gail Jefferson, and Harvey Sacks. 1977. “The Preference for Self-correction in the Organization of Repair in Conversation.” Language 53: 361–382. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schegloff, Emanuel, and Gene H. Lerner. 2009. “Beginning to Respond: Well-prefaced Responses to Wh-questions.” Research on Language & Social Interaction 42 (2): 91–115. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sidnell, Jack. 2010. Conversation Analysis. An Introduction. Oxford, UK: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Singer, Eleanor, Martin R. Frankel, and Marc B. Glassman. 1983. “The Effect of the Interviewer Characteristics and Expectations on Response.” Public Opinion Quarterly 43: 68–83. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Steier, Frederic (ed.). 1991. Research and Reflexivity. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Stivers, Tanya, and Jeffrey D. Robinson. 2006. “A Preference for Progressivity in Interaction.” Language in Society 35: 367–392. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tracy, Karen, and Jessica Robles. 2009. “Questions, Questioning, and Institutional Practices: An Introduction.” Discourse Studies 11 (2): 131–152. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Weatherall, Ann. 2011. “I Don’t Know as a Prepositioned Epistemic Hedge.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 44 (4): 317–337. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (2)

Cited by two other publications

Han, Paul K.J.
2023. Chapter 13. Uncertainty in healthcare. In A Pragmatic Agenda for Healthcare [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series, 338], ► pp. 314 ff. DOI logo
Wermuth, Maria-Cornelia
2016. Language localization in scientific drug information. The Journal of Internationalization and Localization 3:1 ► pp. 74 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 14 july 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.