The expression of emotions in online medical consultationsA comprehensive Spanish-English analysis

  1. Rosa Giménez-Moreno
  2. Alicia Ricart-Vayá
Journal:
Ibérica: Revista de la Asociación Europea de Lenguas para Fines Específicos ( AELFE )

ISSN: 1139-7241,  2340-2784

Year of publication: 2022

Issue: 44

Pages: 239-262

Type: Article

DOI: 10.17398/2340-2784.44.239 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openDialnet editor

More publications in: Ibérica: Revista de la Asociación Europea de Lenguas para Fines Específicos ( AELFE )

Abstract

Doctor-patient interpersonality strategies have evolved considerably in recentyears, mainly due to the increase in telephone and online consultations generatedby the Covid-19 pandemic. In such interactions, the control and expression ofemotions have a crucial influence on the adequacy and effectiveness ofcommunication. Remote interaction makes this affective exchange even morecomplex than in face-to-face consultations. This study aims to configure acomprehensive model for analysing the affective domain in virtual medicalconsultations, useful for English and Spanish patients and learners. With thisaim, the most recognised theories on professional interpersonality are reviewedand applied to a corpus of doctor-patient interactions in Peninsular Spanish andBritish English, extracted from representative forums on the Internet. Theanalysis highlights how specific stance and register variation mechanismspositively and negatively influence the emotional domain in these communicativeexchanges. The proposed model allows significant contrastive findings on theoccurrence and intensity of sentiment markers in both languages. The resultsillustrate how doctors in Spanish favour a more cautious, detached andpredictable encounter, while doctors in English use a greater number and varietyof attitudinal strategies to achieve engagement, empathy and emotional comfort.

Bibliographic References

  • Al-Zyoud, W., Oweis, T., Al-Thawabih, H., Al-Saqqar, F., Al-Kazwini, A., & Al-Hammouri, F. (2021). The Psychological Effects of Physicians' Communication Skills on COVID-19 Patients. Patient preference and adherence, 15, 677–690. https://doi.org/10.2147/PPA.S303869
  • Arroyo Menéndez, M. & Díaz Velázquez, E. (2021). Las tecnologías digitales en el ámbito de la salud: brechas sociales, accesibilidad y despersonalización. Teknokultura. Revista de Cultura Digital y Movimientos Sociales, 18(2), 95-101. https://doi.org/10.5209/tekn.75516
  • Bellés Fortuño, B. (2018). Evaluative language in medical discourse: a contrastive study between English and Spanish university lectures. Languages in Contrast, 18 (2), 155-174. https://doi.org/10.1075/lic.15018.bel
  • Bensing, J. M., Deveugele, M., Moretti, F., Fletcher, I., Van Vliet, L., Van Bogaert, M., & Rimondini, M. (2011). How to make the medical consultation more successful from a patient's perspective? Tips for doctors and patients from lay people in the United Kingdom, Italy, Belgium and the Netherlands. Patient Education and Counseling, 84, 3, 287-293. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2011.06.008.
  • Bleakley, A. (2017). Thinking with Metaphors in Medicine. Routledge.
  • Bobicev, V. & Sokolova, M. (2018). Thumbs up and down: sentiment analysis of medical online forums. Proceedings of the 3rd Social Media Mining for Health Applications (SMM4H) Workshop & Shared Task (pp. 22–26). Association for Computational Linguistics. http://doi.org/10.18653/v1/W18-5906
  • Bokolo A.J. (2021). Implications of telehealth and digital care solutions during COVID-19 pandemic: a qualitative literature review. Informatics for Health and Social Care, 46 (1), 68-83. http://doi.org/10.1080/17538157.2020.1839467
  • Brown, P. & Levinson, S. (1987). Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage. Cambridge University Press.
  • Burleson, B. R. & Goldsmith, D. J. (1998). How the comforting process works: Emotional distress through conversationally induced reappraisals. In P. A. Andersen & L. K. Guerrero (Eds.), Handbook of communication and emotion: Research, theory, applications, and context (pp. 246–281). Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-012057770-5/50011-4
  • Caffi, C. & Janney, R. W. (1994). Toward a pragmatics of emotive communication. Journal of Pragmatics, 22, 325-373.
  • Caffi, C. (1999). On mitigation. Journal of Pragmatics, 31, 881-909.
  • Cate, T. & De Haes, J. (2009). Summative assessment of medical students in the affective domain. Medical Teacher, 22 (1), 40-43.
  • Coombs, R. H., Chopra, S., Schenk, D. R., & Yutan, E. (1993). Medical slang and its functions. Social Science and Medicine, 36 (8), 987-998.
  • Giménez-Moreno, R. (2006). A new approach to register variation: the missing link. Ibérica, 12, 89-110.
  • Giménez-Moreno, R. (2020). Lexical-semantic configuration of ordinary relational identities in multicultural groups of university students. Language and Intercultural Communication, 21 (1), 102-117. https://doi.org/10.1080/14708477.2020.1833901
  • Giménez-Moreno, R. & Martínez-Sierra, J.J. (2017). Roles and registers in digital forum interaction: developing a communicative identity-based approach to register variation. RLA. Revista de Lingüística Teórica y Aplicada, 55 (2), 143-167.
  • Goffman, E. (1981). Forms of Talk. University of Pennsylvania Press.
  • Goldsmith, D. J. (2000). Soliciting advice: The role of sequential placement in mitigating face threat. Communication Monographs, 67, 1-19.
  • Gotti, M. & Salager-Meyer, F. (2006). Advances in medical discourse analysis. Oral and written contexts. Peter Lang.
  • Halliday, M. A. K. (1994). An Introduction to Functional Grammar. Edward Arnold.
  • Haskard-Zolnierek, K., Martin, L. R., Bueno, E. H., & Kruglikova-Sanchez, Y. (2021). Physician-Patient Communication and Satisfaction in Spanish-Language Primary Care Visits. Health Communication. http://doi.org/10.1080/10410236.2021.1973176
  • Heifferon, B. & Brown, S. C. (2009). The rhetoric of healthcare: Essays toward a new disciplinary inquiry. Hampton Press.
  • Hernández Farias, D. I. & Rosso, P. (2017). Irony, sarcasm and sentiment analysis. In F. A. Pozzi, E. Fersini, E. Messina & B. Liu (Eds). Sentiment Analysis in Social Networks (pp. 113-128). Elsevier Morgan Kaufmann. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-804412-4.00007-3
  • Hyland, K. (2017). Metadiscourse: What is it and where is it going? Journal of Pragmatics, 113, 16–29. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2017.03.007
  • Hyland, K. (2019, first published in 2005). Metadiscourse: Exploring interaction in writing. Bloomsbury Academic.
  • Kelly, P.A. (2020). The development of American Psychiatry's Professional Style: DSM-II's "Common Language". Rhetoric of Health & Medicine, 3 (2), 220-248.
  • Kirschbaum, K. & Fortner, S. A. (2012). Medical culture and communication, Journal of Communication in Healthcare, 5 (3), 182-189. http://doi.org/10.1179/1753807612Y.0000000010
  • Mahoney, M. (2015). Social Media Health Communication: A Cross-Cultural Investigation on the Motivations and Challenges of Using Participatory Technology to Communicate with Patients. Online Journal of Communication and Media Technologies, 5, 141-162.
  • Mapelli, G. (2015). La comunicación (e)-médico-paciente en los foros de salud. In L. Chierichetti and G. Mapelli (Eds.), Discurso médico. Reflexiones Lingüísticas, históricas y lexicográficas (pp. 131-150). CELSB.
  • Martin, J.R. & White, P.R. (2005). The Language of Evaluation, Appraisal in English. Palgrave Macmillan.
  • McNeilis, K. S. (2001). Analysing communication competence in medical consultations. Journal of Health Communication, 13, 5-18.
  • Ong, L. M., De Haes, J. C., Hoos, A. M., & Lammes, F. B. (1995). Doctor-patient communication: A review of the literature. Journal of Social Science & Literature, 40 (7), 903-918.
  • Salager-Meyer, F. (1985). Specialist medical English lexis: Classificatory framework and rhetorical functions. EMP Newsletter, 2 (2), 5-18.
  • Salager-Meyer, F. (2014). Origin and development of English for medical purposes. Part II: Research on spoken medical English. Medical Writing, 23 (2), 129-131.
  • Schmid Mast, M., Kindlimann, A., & Langewitz, W. (2005). Recipients' perspective on breaking bad news: How you put it really makes a difference. Patient Education and Counseling, 58, 244–251.
  • Staples, S., Venetis, M. K., Robinson, J.D., & Dultz, R. (2020). Understanding the multi-dimensional nature of informational language in health care interactions. Register Studies, 2 (2), 241-274. https://doi.org/10.1075/rs.19009.sta
  • Taboada, M. (2016). Sentiment analysis: An overview from linguistics. Annual Review of Linguistics. 2, 325-347.
  • Taboada, M., Brooke, J. Tofiloski, M., Voll, K., & Stede, M. (2011). Lexicon-based methods for sentiment analysis. Computational linguistics, 37 (2), 267-307.
  • Tagarev, T. & Ratchev, V. (2020). A taxonomy of crisis management functions. Sustainability, 12 (12), 5147. http://doi.org/10.3390/su12125147
  • White, P.R. (2015). Appraisal theory. In K. Tracy, C. Ilie & T. Sandel (Eds.), The International Encyclopedia of Language and Social Interaction. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
  • Wiebe, D. J. & Korbel, C. (2003). Defensive denial, affect, and the self-regulation of health threats. In L.D. Cameron and H. Levelthal (Eds.), The Self-regulation of Health and Illness Behaviour (pp. 184-203). Routledge.
  • Wilson, D., Williams, M., & Butler, D. (2008). Language and the pain experience. Physiotherapy Research International, 14 (1). https://doi.org/10.1002/pri.424
  • Xin Z. & Yansheng M. (2021). Trust me, I am a Doctor: Discourse of Trustworthiness by Chinese Doctors in Online Medical Consultation. Health Communication, 36 (3), 372-380. https://doi.org/10.1080/10410236.2019.1692491
Data source: Dialnet