{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.015051740357478834, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.954248366013072, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Interaction and Asymmetry in Clinical Discourse

This article investigates the way in which physicians or clinicians apparently advance their professional dominance by ignoring lifeworld concerns of the patients of clients they see. Usual analyses of this phenomenon invoke conceptions of authority to explain it implicitly, or they propose that the asymmetry of clinical discourse relies solely on an institutional basis. In order to discover and analyze interactional aspects of the clinical encounter, comparative studies between institutional and everyday contexts are necessary. This article demonstrates that, through the use of a conversational "perspective display series," which is adapted to the clinical environment, a delivery of "bad" diagnosis news can coimplicate the patient's perspective and promote understanding and the appearance of agreement between clinician and patient. In general, describing manifestations of institutional power and authority should include analysis of the ways that participants organize interaction in the first place.