IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v65y2007i4p725-737.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Doctors being up there and we being down here: A metaphorical analysis of talk about student/doctor-patient relationships

Author

Listed:
  • Rees, Charlotte E.
  • Knight, Lynn V.
  • Wilkinson, Clare E.

Abstract

This paper describes the metaphorical conceptualisations of student/doctor-patient relationships, as articulated by multiple stakeholders in healthcare. Eight focus group discussions with 19 patients, 13 medical students and 15 medical educators (comprising doctors, other healthcare professionals and non-clinical academics) were conducted in England and we subjected our transcribed and audiotaped data to a secondary level of data analysis i.e. systematic metaphor analysis. The analysis revealed six over-arching metaphors associated with the target domain of student/doctor-patient relationships i.e. STUDENT/DOCTOR-PATIENT RELATIONSHIPS AS WAR, HIERARCHY, DOCTOR-CENTREDNESS, MARKET, MACHINE and THEATRE. All of the metaphors (except theatre) emphasised the oppositional quality of student/doctor-patient relationships. Three of the source domains emerging from our empirical data (i.e. hierarchy, doctor-centredness, and market) relate to metaphors already employed in the non-empirical literature to discuss doctor-patient relationships (e.g. paternalism, patient-centredness, and consumerism). The three remaining source domains (i.e. war, machine and theatre) were novel in their conceptualisation of student/doctor-patient relationships, albeit that they have been reported in previous empirical literature to describe other target domains. In this paper, we discuss each of these metaphors and their associated entailments, including those found in our data and those absent from our data. We also differentiate between the unconscious use of metaphorical linguistic expressions by our participants and those serving a rhetorical function. Although analysing metaphoric talk is not without its difficulties, the construction of metaphoric models can help social researchers better understand how individuals conceptualise and construct student/doctor-patient relationships.

Suggested Citation

  • Rees, Charlotte E. & Knight, Lynn V. & Wilkinson, Clare E., 2007. "Doctors being up there and we being down here: A metaphorical analysis of talk about student/doctor-patient relationships," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 65(4), pages 725-737, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:65:y:2007:i:4:p:725-737
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277-9536(07)00168-2
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Charles, Cathy & Gafni, Amiram & Whelan, Tim, 1997. "Shared decision-making in the medical encounter: What does it mean? (or it takes at least two to tango)," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 44(5), pages 681-692, March.
    2. Lehoux, Pascale & Poland, Blake & Daudelin, Genevieve, 2006. "Focus group research and "the patient's view"," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 63(8), pages 2091-2104, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Shaw, Malissa Kay & Rees, Charlotte E. & Andersen, Nina Bjerre & Black, Lori Faye & Monrouxe, Lynn V., 2018. "Professionalism lapses and hierarchies: A qualitative analysis of medical students' narrated acts of resistance," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 219(C), pages 45-53.
    2. Frédéric Basso & Philippe Robert-Demontrond & Maryvonne Hayek & Jean-Luc Anton & Bruno Nazarian & Muriel Roth & Olivier Oullier, 2014. "Why People Drink Shampoo? Food Imitating Products Are Fooling Brains and Endangering Consumers for Marketing Purposes," Post-Print halshs-01183005, HAL.
    3. Basso, Frédéric & Robert-Demontrond, Philippe & Hayek, Maryvonne & Anton, Jean-Luc & Nazarian, Bruno & Roth, Muriel & Oullier, Olivier, 2014. "Why people drink shampoo? Food imitating products are fooling brains and endangering consumers for marketing purposes," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 59224, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    4. Delbaere, Marjorie, 2013. "Metaphors and myths in pharmaceutical advertising," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 21-29.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Manuel Antonio Espinoza & Andrea Manca & Karl Claxton & Mark Sculpher, 2018. "Social value and individual choice: The value of a choice‐based decision‐making process in a collectively funded health system," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 27(2), pages 28-40, February.
    2. Hyojung Tak & Gregory Ruhnke & Ya-Chen Shih, 2015. "The Association between Patient-Centered Attributes of Care and Patient Satisfaction," The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Springer;International Academy of Health Preference Research, vol. 8(2), pages 187-197, April.
    3. Miller, Nancy & Weinstein, Marcie, 2007. "Participation and knowledge related to a nursing home admission decision among a working age population," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 64(2), pages 303-313, January.
    4. France Légaré & Annette M. O'Connor & Ian D. Graham & Georges A. Wells & Stéphane Tremblay, 2006. "Impact of the Ottawa Decision Support Framework on the Agreement and the Difference between Patients' and Physicians' Decisional Conflict," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 26(4), pages 373-390, July.
    5. Odette Wegwarth & Wolfgang Gaissmaier & Gerd Gigerenzer, 2011. "Deceiving Numbers," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 31(3), pages 386-394, May.
    6. Karnieli-Miller, Orit & Eisikovits, Zvi, 2009. "Physician as partner or salesman? Shared decision-making in real-time encounters," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 69(1), pages 1-8, July.
    7. Paul C. Schroy III & Karen Emmons & Ellen Peters & Julie T. Glick & Patricia A. Robinson & Maria A. Lydotes & Shamini Mylvanaman & Stephen Evans & Christine Chaisson & Michael Pignone & Marianne Prout, 2011. "The Impact of a Novel Computer-Based Decision Aid on Shared Decision Making for Colorectal Cancer Screening," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 31(1), pages 93-107, January.
    8. Mei-Chun Cheung & Derry Law & Joanne Yip & Jason Pui Yin Cheung, 2022. "Adolescents’ Experience during Brace Treatment for Scoliosis: A Qualitative Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(17), pages 1-10, August.
    9. Meike Müller-Engelmann & Norbert Donner-Banzhoff & Heidi Keller & Lydia Rosinger & Carsten Sauer & Kerstin Rehfeldt & Tanja Krones, 2013. "When Decisions Should Be Shared," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 33(1), pages 37-47, January.
    10. Margaret Gerteis & Rosemary Borck, "undated". "Shared Decision-Making in Practice: Lessons from Implementation Efforts," Mathematica Policy Research Reports f802e52b8442486594ecda927, Mathematica Policy Research.
    11. Mark Sculpher & Amiram Gafni, 2001. "Recognizing diversity in public preferences: The use of preference sub‐groups in cost‐effectiveness analysis," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 10(4), pages 317-324, June.
    12. Coast, Joanna, 2018. "A history that goes hand in hand: Reflections on the development of health economics and the role played by Social Science & Medicine, 1967–2017," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 196(C), pages 227-232.
    13. Ruth Astbury & Ashley Shepherd & Helen Cheyne, 2017. "Working in partnership: the application of shared decision‐making to health visitor practice," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 26(1-2), pages 215-224, January.
    14. Vivek Goel & Carol A. Sawka & Elaine C. Thiel & Elaine H. Gort & Annette M. O’Connor, 2001. "Randomized Trial of a Patient Decision Aid for Choice of Surgical Treatment for Breast Cancer," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 21(1), pages 1-6, February.
    15. Solomon, Josie & Knapp, Peter & Raynor, D.K. & Atkin, Karl, 2013. "Worlds apart? An exploration of prescribing and medicine-taking decisions by patients, GPs and local policy makers," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 112(3), pages 264-272.
    16. Debra Kerr & Rosie Crone & Trisha Dunning, 2020. "Perspectives about dignity during acute care for older people and their relatives: A qualitative study," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(21-22), pages 4116-4127, November.
    17. Tate, Alexandra, 2020. "Invoking death: How oncologists discuss a deadly outcome," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 246(C).
    18. Wirtz, Veronika & Cribb, Alan & Barber, Nick, 2006. "Patient-doctor decision-making about treatment within the consultation--A critical analysis of models," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 62(1), pages 116-124, January.
    19. K. Tiller & B. Meiser & C. Gaff & J. Kirk & T. Dudding & K.-A. Phillips & M. Friedlander & K. Tucker, 2006. "A Randomized Controlled Trial of a Decision Aid for Women at Increased Risk of Ovarian Cancer," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 26(4), pages 360-372, July.
    20. Yoko Ueno & Mayumi Kako & Mitsuko Ohira & Hitoshi Okamura, 2020. "Shared decision‐making for women facing an unplanned pregnancy: A qualitative study," Nursing & Health Sciences, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 22(4), pages 1186-1196, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:65:y:2007:i:4:p:725-737. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.