All Academic, Inc. Research Logo

Info/CitationFAQResearchAll Academic Inc.
Document

Re-conceptualizing interruptions in physician-patient interview: Co-operative and intrusive
Unformatted Document Text:  Interruption Patterns 14 interruption is made up of three subcategories, agreement, assistance, and clarification. Intrusive interruption consists of disagreement, topic change, floor-taking, and tangentialization. Each subcategory was coded according to the definition by Murata (1994), Kennedy and Camden (1983), and Li (2001). Inter-scorer Reliability One of the researchers made verbatim transcripts of the audio-taped conversations. Two scorers independently coded the data for frequencies of successful and unsuccessful interruptions using the coding scheme presented above. In scoring the data, scorers were required to write down all identifiable details of interruptions including the provider and the words or sentences prior to the interruption, the interruption proper, and the words or sentences immediately after the interruption. Although transcripts were available, scorers were required to score interruptions from the audiotape, using transcripts as references. The inter-scorer reliability (Pearson Correlation) was .87 for intrusive interruptions, .89 for cooperative interruptions and .91 for unsuccessful interruptions. Differences between the two scorers were settled by reviewing the definitions. Take the following exchange as an example: Patient: Oh! This ear. It’s the /same ear/ that always gets plugged. Physician: /this ear?/ Initially one scorer coded this instance as successful interruption, the other unsuccessful interruption. The argument for an unsuccessful interruption was the patient didn’t relent the floor and continued until she finished her utterance. After reviewing the definitions for both successful and unsuccessful definitions, the two scorers agreed that it was a successful interruption. The physician cut off the patient before she finished a complete utterance and the physician finished the utterance.

Authors: Li, Han., Krysko, Michael., Desroches, Naghmeh. and Deagle, George.
first   previous   Page 14 of 37   next   last



background image
Interruption Patterns
14
interruption is made up of three subcategories, agreement, assistance, and clarification.
Intrusive interruption consists of disagreement, topic change, floor-taking, and
tangentialization. Each subcategory was coded according to the definition by Murata
(1994), Kennedy and Camden (1983), and Li (2001).
Inter-scorer Reliability
One of the researchers made verbatim transcripts of the audio-taped conversations.
Two scorers independently coded the data for frequencies of successful and unsuccessful
interruptions using the coding scheme presented above. In scoring the data, scorers were
required to write down all identifiable details of interruptions including the provider and
the words or sentences prior to the interruption, the interruption proper, and the words or
sentences immediately after the interruption. Although transcripts were available, scorers
were required to score interruptions from the audiotape, using transcripts as references.
The inter-scorer reliability (Pearson Correlation) was .87 for intrusive interruptions, .89
for cooperative interruptions and .91 for unsuccessful interruptions. Differences between
the two scorers were settled by reviewing the definitions. Take the following exchange as
an example:
Patient:
Oh! This ear. It’s the /same ear/ that always gets plugged.
Physician:
/this ear?/
Initially one scorer coded this instance as successful interruption, the other unsuccessful
interruption. The argument for an unsuccessful interruption was the patient didn’t relent the floor
and continued until she finished her utterance. After reviewing the definitions for both successful
and unsuccessful definitions, the two scorers agreed that it was a successful interruption. The
physician cut off the patient before she finished a complete utterance and the physician finished
the utterance.


Convention
All Academic Convention makes running your annual conference simple and cost effective. It is your online solution for abstract management, peer review, and scheduling for your annual meeting or convention.
Submission - Custom fields, multiple submission types, tracks, audio visual, multiple upload formats, automatic conversion to pdf.
Review - Peer Review, Bulk reviewer assignment, bulk emails, ranking, z-score statistics, and multiple worksheets!
Reports - Many standard and custom reports generated while you wait. Print programs with participant indexes, event grids, and more!
Scheduling - Flexible and convenient grid scheduling within rooms and buildings. Conflict checking and advanced filtering.
Communication - Bulk email tools to help your administrators send reminders and responses. Use form letters, a message center, and much more!
Management - Search tools, duplicate people management, editing tools, submission transfers, many tools to manage a variety of conference management headaches!
Click here for more information.

first   previous   Page 14 of 37   next   last

©2012 All Academic, Inc.