Advertisement

Negotiating Post-Consultation ‘Homework’ Tasks Between Counselors and Clients

  • Tom Strong
  • Helen F. Massfeller
Original Article

Abstract

Counselors frequently conclude consultations with clients with suggestions or prescriptions for clients to follow up on, post-consultation. In this paper, we conceptualize the discussion regarding such post-consultation tasks as negotiations between counselor and client, focusing in particular on what observably occurs and is ‘talked into being’ in those negotiations. Using conversation analysis we examined 12 passages of dialogue wherein counselors and clients concluded a single session consultation by negotiating some ‘homework’ task. Our micro-analyses of three of these homework dialogues shows conversational practices used in negotiating them. We also invited participants in those dialogues to comment independently on their videotaped participation in them. We conclude by relating our findings to training and other considerations where homework dialogues and homework adherence can be a concern.

Keywords

Counseling Homework Conversational analysis 

References

  1. Anderson, H. (1997). Conversation, language and possibilities. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  2. Anscombe, G. E. M. (1957). Intention. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
  3. Bakhtin, M. (1981). The dialogic imagination (M. Holquist, Ed., C. Emerson & M. Holquist, Trans.). Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
  4. Bavelas, J. B., Coates, L., & Johnston, T. (2000). Listeners as co-narrators. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 941–952.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Berg, I. K., & DeJong, P. J. (1997). Interviewing for solutions. Pacific Grove: Brooks/Cole.Google Scholar
  6. Brodley, B. T. (2006). Client-initiated homework in client-centered therapy. Journal of Psychotherapy Integration, 16, 140–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cormier, S., & Hackney, H. (1999). Counseling strategies and interventions (5th ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.Google Scholar
  8. Couture, S., & Sutherland, O. (2006). Giving advice on advice-giving: a conversation analysis of Karl Tomm’s practice. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 32, 329–345.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Daniels, H. (2007). Pedagogy. In H. Daniels, M. Cole & J. V. Wertsch (Eds.), The Cambridge companion to Vygotsky (pp. 307–331). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Dattilio, F. M., & Bahadur, M. (2005). Cognitive-behavioural therapy with an East Indian family. Contemporary Family Therapy, 27, 367–382.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. de Shazer, S. (1984). The death of resistance. Family Process, 23(1), 11–21.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Detweiler-Bedell, J. B., & Whisman, M. A. (2005). A lesson in assigning homework: therapist, client, and task characteristics in cognitive therapy for depression. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 36, 219–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Edwards, D., & Potter, J. (1992). Discursive psychology. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  14. Elliott, R. (1989). Comprehensive process analysis: Understanding the change process in significant therapy events. In M. Packer & R. B. Addison (Eds.), Entering the circle: Hermeneutic investigation in psychology (pp. 165–184). Albany: SUNY.Google Scholar
  15. Falvo, D. R. (2003). Effective patient education: A guide to increased compliance. Toronto: Jones & Bartlett.Google Scholar
  16. Ferrara, K. (1994). Therapeutic ways with words. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Foo, K. H., & Kazantzis, N. (2007). Integrating homework assignments based on culture: working with Chinese patients. Cognitive and Behavioral Practice, 14, 333–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Gadamer, H.-G. (1988). Truth and method (Rev. ed., J. Weinsheimer, Trans.). New York: Continuum.Google Scholar
  19. Gale, J. (1991). Conversation analysis of therapeutic discourse. Norwood: Ablex.Google Scholar
  20. Garfinkel, H. (1967). Studies in ethnomethodology. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  21. Garfinkel, H. (2002). Ethnomethodology’s program: Working out Durkheim’s aphorism. In A. Rawls (Ed.), Lanham: Rowan & LittlefieldGoogle Scholar
  22. Gergen, K. (1999). Invitation to social construction. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  23. Goffman, E. (1967). The interaction order. New York: Pantheon.Google Scholar
  24. Goffman, E. (1981). Forms of talk. Toronto: Scholarly Book Services Inc.Google Scholar
  25. Heritage, J. (1984). Garfinkel and ethnomethodology. Cambridge, MA: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  26. Kazantzis, N., & L’Abate, L. (eds). (2007). Handbook of homework assignments in psychotherapy: Research practice and prevention. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  27. Kazantzis, N., Lampropulos, F., & Deane, F. P. (2005). A national survey of practicing psychologists’ use and attitudes toward homework in psychotherapy. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 73, 742–748.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Kitzinger, C., & Frith, H. (1999). Just say no? The use of conversation analysis in developing a feminist perspective on sexual refusal. Discourse and Society, 10, 293–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Kogan, S. M. (1998). The politics of making meaning: discourse analysis of a ‘postmodern’ interview. Journal of Family Therapy, 20(3), 229–251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Koshik, I. (2005). Rhetorical questions. Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
  31. Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  32. Linell, P. (2001). Approaching dialogue. Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
  33. Madsen, W. (1999). Collaborative therapy for multi-stressed families. New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
  34. Maynard, D. W. (1991). The perspective-display series and the delivery and receipt of diagnostic news. In D. Boden & D. Zimmerman (Eds.), Talk and social structure: Studies in ethnomethodology and conversation analysis (pp. 162–192). Cambridge: Polity.Google Scholar
  35. Meichenbaum, D., & Turk, D. (1987). Facilitating treatment adherence: A practitioner’s guidebook. New York: Plenum.Google Scholar
  36. Morson, C., & Emerson, C. (1990). Mikhail Bakhtin: Creation of a prosaics. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  37. Nelson, D. L., Castonguay, L. G., & Barwick, F. (2007). Direction for the integration of homework in practice. In N. Kazantzis & L. L’Abate (Eds.), Handbook of homework assignments in psychotherapy: Research practice and prevention (pp. 425–444). New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Parsons, T. (1951). The social system. New York: The Free.Google Scholar
  39. Peräkylä, A., Antaki, C., Vehviläinen, S., & Leudar, I. (eds). (2008). Conversation analysis and psychotherapy. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  40. Pomerantz, A. M. (1984). Agreeing and disagreeing with assessments: Some features of preferred/dispreferred turn shapes. In J. M. Atkinson & J. Heritage (Eds.), Structures of social action: Studies in conversation analysis (pp. 57–101). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  41. Potter, J. (1996). Representing reality. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  42. Ronan, K. R., & Kazantzis, N. (2006). The use of between-session (homework) activities in psychotherapy: conclusions. Journal of Psychotherapy Integration, 16, 254–259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Sacks, H. (1995). Lectures on conversation. In G. Jefferson (Ed.), Vols. 1 & 2. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  44. Sacks, H., Schegloff, E., & Jefferson, G. (1974). A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation. Language, 50, 696–735.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Sampson, E. E. (1993). Celebrating the other: A dialogic account of human nature. Boulder: Westview.Google Scholar
  46. Schegloff, E. A. (1980). Preliminaries to preliminaries: ‘can I ask you a question’. Sociological Inquiry, 50, 104–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Schiffrin, D. (1987). Discourse markers. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  48. Schön, D. (1983). The reflective practitioner. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  49. Shotter, J. (1993). Conversational realities. Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  50. Silverman, D. (2001). The construction of ‘delicate’ objects in counselling. In M. Wetherell, S. Taylor & S. J. Yates (Eds.), Discourse theory and practice: A reader (pp. 119–137). London: Sage.Google Scholar
  51. Smith, D. E. (2006). Introduction. In D. E. Smith (Ed.), Institutional ethnography (pp. 1–11). Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
  52. Strong, T. (2006). Wordsmithing in counselling? European Journal of Psychotherapy and Counselling, 8, 251–268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Strong, T., Zeman, D., & Foskett, A. (2006). Introducing new topics and discourses into counseling interactions: a micro-analytic examination. Journal of Constructivist Psychology, 19(1), 67–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Strong, T., Busch, R. S., & Couture, S. (2008). Conversational evidence in therapeutic dialogue. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 34, 388–405.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. ten Have, P. (1999). Doing conversation analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  56. Tomm, K. (1988). Interventive interviewing. Part III. Intending to ask lineal, circular, strategic or reflexive questions. Family Process, 27, 1–15.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  57. White, M., & Epston, D. (1990). Narrative means to therapeutic ends. New York: Norton.Google Scholar
  58. Wittgenstein, L. (1958). Philosophical Investigations (3rd ed., G.E.M. Anscombe, Trans). New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  59. Woods, D. (2007). Transana (Version 2.20). Available from: http://www.transana.org/.
  60. Wooffitt, R. (2005). Conversation analysis and discourse analysis. London: Sage.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of CalgaryCalgaryCanada

Personalised recommendations