In this article, we examine comparative time-framed experience telling: episodes of interaction in health promotion group discussions in which one of the participants tells their experience and, in response, another participant tells their own experiences from separate moments or periods of their life and compares them. In so doing, group members reinforce and encourage the previous speaker’s positive stance or challenge the negative stance toward contextually relevant objects: behavior change and suggested solutions. This practice allows group members to demonstrate their independent access to experiences that are similar to those of the other, present evidence of similarities and differences between the experiences, and show their epistemic independence regarding their claims. By recontextualizing the experience of the other in this way, it becomes possible for the group members to interpret and even oppose it while maintaining a level of understanding of the differences between the experiences in question and respecting them.
AndersenE. M. (2017). Typing yourself accountable: Objectifying subjective experiences in an online health forum. Linguistik Online, 87(8). doi:10.13092/lo.87.4172
2.
ArminenI. (1998). Sharing experiences: Doing therapy with the help of mutual references in the meetings of Alcoholics Anonymous. Sociological Quarterly, 39, 491–515. doi:10.1111/j.1533-8525.1998.tb00515.x
3.
ArminenI. (2004). Second stories: The salience of interpersonal communication for mutual help in Alcoholics Anonymous. Journal of Pragmatics, 36, 319–347. doi:10.1016/j.pragma.2003.07.001
4.
BorekA. J.AbrahamC. (2018). How do small groups promote behaviour change? An integrative conceptual review of explanatory mechanisms. Applied Psychology: Health and Well-Being, 10, 30–61. doi:10.1111/aphw.12120
5.
BoströmE.IsakssonU.LundmanB.GraneheimU. H.HörnstenÅ. (2014). Interaction between diabetes specialist nurses and patients during group sessions about self-management in type 2 diabetes. Patient Education and Counseling, 94, 187–192. doi:10.1016/j.pec.2013.10.010
6.
ClarkS.Rendle-ShortJ. (2016). Accomplishing a continuing relationship in psychotherapy: Updates and the role of time references. Australian Journal of Linguistics, 26, 239–256. doi:10.1080/07268602.2015.1121533
7.
CormackD.JonesF. W.MaltbyM. (2018). A “collective effort to make yourself feel better”: The group process in mindfulness-based interventions. Qualitative Health Research, 28, 3–15. doi:10.1177/1049732317733448
8.
CranwellJ.Seymour-SmithS. (2012). Monitoring and normalising a lack of appetite and weight loss: A discursive analysis of an online support group for bariatric surgery. Appetite, 58, 873–881. doi:10.1016/j.appet.2012.01.029
9.
Du BoisJ. W. (2007). The stance triangle. In EnglebretsonR. (Ed.), Stancetaking in discourse: Subjectivity, evaluation, interaction (pp. 139–182). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins. doi:10.1075/pbns.164.07du
10.
Du BoisJ. W.KärkkäinenE. (2012). Taking a stance on emotion: Affect, sequence, and intersubjectivity in dialogic interaction. Text & Talk, 32, 433–451. doi:10.1515/text-2012-0021
11.
Due-ChristensenM.ZoffmannV.HommelE.LauM. (2012). Can sharing experiences in groups reduce the burden of living with diabetes, regardless of glycaemic control?Diabetic Medicine, 29, 251–256. doi:10.1111/j.1464-5491.2011.03521.x
FrigerioA.MontaliL. (2016). An ethnographic-discursive approach to parental self-help groups: The case of ADHD. Qualitative Health Research, 26, 935–950. doi:10.1177/1049732315586553
14.
HalonenM. (2008). Person reference as a device for constructing experiences as typical in group therapy. In AntakiC.VehviläinenS.PeräkyläA.LeudarI. (Eds.), Conversation analysis and psychotherapy (pp. 139–151). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511490002.009
15.
HayanoK. (2016). Subjective assessments: Managing territory of experience in conversation. In RobinsonJ. D. (Ed.), Accountability in social interaction (pp. 207–236). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780190210557.003.0007
16.
HeritageJ. (2002). Oh-prefaced responses to assessments: A method of modifying agreement/disagreement. In FordC.FoxB.ThompsonS. (Eds.), The language of turn and sequence (pp. 196–224). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
17.
HeritageJ. (2011). Territories of knowledge, territories of experience: Empathic moments in interaction. In MondadaL.StiversT.SteensigJ. (Eds.), The morality of knowledge in conversation (pp. 159–183). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511921674.008
18.
HeritageJ. (2013). Action formation and its epistemic (and other) backgrounds. Discourse Studies, 15, 551–578. doi:10.1177/1461445613501449
19.
HeritageJ.LindströmA. (2012). Knowledge, empathy and emotion in a medical encounter. In PeräkyläA.SorjonenM.-L. (Eds.), Emotion in interaction (pp. 256–273). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199730735.003.0012
20.
HeritageJ.RaymondG. (2005). The terms of agreement: Indexing epistemic authority and subordination in assessment sequences. Social Psychology Quarterly, 68, 15–38. doi:10.1177/019027250506800103
21.
HoddinottP.AllanK.AvenellA.BrittenJ. (2010). Group interventions to improve health outcomes: A framework for their design and delivery. BMC Public Health, 101(1), Article 800. doi:10.1186/1471-2458-10-800
22.
HolmesS. E.KivlighanD. M.Jr. (2000). Comparison of therapeutic factors in group and individual treatment processes. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 47, 478–484. doi:10.1037/0022-0167.47.4.478
23.
HoltE. (1996). Reporting on talk: The use of direct reported speech in conversation. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 29, 219–245. doi:10.1207/s15327973rlsi2903_2
24.
HughesS.LewisS.WillisK.RogersA.WykeS.SmithL. (2017). The experience of facilitators and participants of long term condition self-management group programmes: A qualitative synthesis. Patient Education and Counseling, 100, 2244–2254. doi:10.1016/j.pec.2017.06.035
25.
JeffersonG. (1988). On the sequential organization of troubles talk in ordinary conversation. Social Problems, 35, 418–442. doi:10.2307/800595
26.
JeffersonG. (2004). Glossary of transcript symbols with an introduction. In LernerG., (Ed.), Conversation analysis: Studies from the first generation (pp. 13–31). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins. doi:10.1075/pbns.125.02jef
27.
KääntäL.LehtinenE. (2016). Patterns of experience talk and argumentation in digital peer learning discussions. Language@Internet, 13(2). urn:nbn:de:0009-7-44078
28.
KennedyA.RogersA.CrossleyM. (2007). Participation, roles, and the dynamics of change in a group-delivered self-management course for people living with HIV. Qualitative Health Research, 17, 744–758. doi:10.1177/1049732307302754
29.
KuroshimaS.IwataN. (2016). On displaying empathy: Dilemma, category, and experience. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 49, 92–110. doi:10.1080/08351813.2016.1164395
30.
LaitinenJ.KorkiakangasE.AlahuhtaM.Keinänen-KiukaanniemiS.RajalaU.TimonenO.. . . OlkkonenS. (2010). Feasibility of videoconferencing in lifestyle group counselling. International Journal of Circumpolar Health, 69, 500–511.
31.
LaitinenL. (2006). Zero person in Finnish: A grammatical resource for construing human evidence. In HelasvuoM. L.CampbellL. (Eds.), Grammar from the human perspective: Case, space and person in Finnish (pp. 209–232). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins. doi:10.1075/cilt.277.15lai
LockeA. (2004). Accounting for success and failure: A discursive psychological approach to sport talk. Quest, 56, 302–320. doi:10.1080/00336297.2004.10491828
34.
LogrenA.RuusuvuoriJ.LaitinenJ. (2017a). Group members’ questions shape participation in health counselling and health education. Patient Education and Counseling, 100, 1828–1841.
35.
LogrenA.RuusuvuoriJ.LaitinenJ. (2017b). Self-reflective talk in group counselling. Discourse Studies, 19, 422–440.
36.
LogrenA.RuusuvuoriJ.LaitinenJ. (2019). Peer responses to self-disclosures in group counseling. Text & Talk, 39, 613–647.
37.
LundK.ArgentzellE.LeufstadiusC.TjörnstrandC.EklundM. (2019). Joining, belonging, and re-valuing: A process of meaning-making through group participation in a mental health lifestyle intervention. Scandinavian Journal of Occupational Therapy, 26, 55–68. doi:10.1080/11038128.2017.1409266
38.
MazanderaniF.LocockL.PowellJ. (2012). Being differently the same: The mediation of identity tensions in the sharing of illness experiences. Social Science & Medicine, 74, 546–553. doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2011.10.036
39.
MillerG.SilvermanD. (1995). Troubles talk and counseling discourse: A comparative study. Sociological Quarterly, 36, 725–747.
40.
ÖsterI.HedestigO.JohanssonM.KlingstedtN.LindhJ. (2013). Sharing experiences in a support group: Men’s talk during the radiotherapy period for prostate cancer. Palliative and Supportive Care, 11, 331–339. doi:10.1017/S1478951512000661
41.
PattersonF.FlemingJ.DoigE. (2019). Patient perceptions of participation in group-based rehabilitation in an inpatient brain injury rehabilitation setting. Patient Education and Counseling, 102, 148–154. doi:10.1016/j.pec.2018.08.001
42.
PeräkyläA.SilvermanD. (1991). Owning experience: Describing the experience of other persons. Text, 11, 441–480. doi:10.1515/text.1.1991.11.3.441
43.
PinoM. (2016). Knowledge displays: Soliciting clients to fill knowledge gaps and to reconcile knowledge discrepancies in therapeutic interaction. Patient Education and Counseling, 996, 897–904.
44.
PinoM. (2017). I-challenges: Influencing others’ perspectives by mentioning personal experiences in therapeutic community group meetings. Social Psychology Quarterly, 80, 217–242. doi:10.1177/0190272517706048
45.
PollnerM.SteinJ. (1996). Narrative mapping of social worlds: The voice of experience in alcoholics anonymous. Symbolic Interaction, 19, 203–223. doi:10.1525/si.1996.19.3.203
46.
RaymondC. W.WhiteA. E. C. (2017). Time reference in the service of social action. Social Psychology Quarterly, 80, 109–131. doi:10.1177/0190272516689468
47.
RobinsonJ. D. (2007). The role of numbers and statistics within conversation analysis. Communication Methods and Measures, 1, 65–75. doi:10.1080/19312450709336663
48.
RuusuvuoriJ. (2005). “Empathy” and “sympathy” in action: Attending to patients’ troubles in Finnish homeopathic and general practice consultations. Social Psychology Quarterly, 68, 204–222.
49.
RuusuvuoriJ.AsmußB.HenttonenP.RavajaN. (2019). Complaining about others at work. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 52, 41–62.
50.
RuusuvuoriJ.VoutilainenL. (2009). Comparing affiliating responses to troubles-tellings in different types of health care encounters. In HaakanaM.LaaksoM.LindströmJ. (Eds.), Talk in interaction: Comparative dimensions (pp. 206–230). Helsinki, Finland: Suomalaisen Kirjallisuuden Seura (SKS).
51.
SacksH. (1984). On doing “being ordinary.” In AtkinsonJ. M.HeritageJ. (Eds.), Structures of social action: Studies in conversation analysis (pp. 413–429). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511665868.024
52.
SacksH. (1988). On members’ measurement systems. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 22, 45–60. doi:10.1080/08351818809389297
SpeerS. A. (2012). The interactional organization of self-praise: Epistemics, preference organisation and implications for identity research. Social Psychology Quarterly, 75, 52–79. doi:10.1177/0190272511432939
55.
SteadL. F.CarrollA. J.LancasterT. (2017). Group behaviour therapy programmes for smoking cessation. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 3, CD001007. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD001007.Pub3
56.
SuomalainenK.VarjoM. (2018, July15). On the border of subjective & intersubjective: The Finnish zeroperson & open 2nd person singular construction in the organisation of experience in everyday conversations. Conference presentation at 5th International Conference on Conversation Analysis, Loughborough University, UK.
57.
TaggartJ.WilliamsA.DennisS.NewallA.ShortusT.ZwarN.HarrisM. F. (2012). A systematic review of interventions in primary care to improve health literacy for chronic disease behavioral risk factors. BMC Family Practice, 13, Article 49. doi:10.1186/1471-2296-13-49
58.
TiitinenS.WeisteE.RuusuvuoriJ.LaitinenJ. (2018). Ryhmänohjauksen vuorovaikutusmekanismit vertaistuen kokemusten taustalla [Interactional mechanisms explaining the experiences of peer support in group counseling]. Psykologia, 53, 345–363.
59.
TurpeinenM.NevanperäN.TurunenJ.WeisteE.SalmiA.LaitinenJ. (submitted). Associations between work ability, health promotion and business performance among female microentrepreneurs.
60.
VeenM.te MolderH.GremmenB.van WoerkumC. (2010). Quitting is not an option: An analysis of online diet talk between celiac disease patients. Health, 14, 23–40. doi:10.1177/1363459309347478
61.
WebbH. (2009). “I’ve put weight on cos I’ve bin inactive, cos I’ve ’ad me knee done”: Moral work in the obesity clinic. Sociology of Health & Illness, 31, 854–871. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9566.2009.01188.x
62.
WeisteE.VoutilainenL.PeräkyläA. (2015). Epistemic asymmetries in psychotherapy interaction: Therapists’ practices for displaying access to clients’ inner experiences. Sociology of Health & Illness, 38, 645–661. doi:10.1111/1467-9566.12384
WuR. J. R. (2012). Self-praising through reporting: Strategic use of two reporting practices in Mandarin conversation. Discourse Processes, 49, 622–659. doi:10.1080/0163853X.2012.722060
65.
YalomI. D.LeszczM. (2005). The theory and practice of group psychotherapy (5th ed.). New York: Basic Books.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
