Premium
Multiple voices in Charles Van Riper's desensitization therapy
Author(s) -
Leahy Margaret M.
Publication year - 2008
Publication title -
international journal of language and communication disorders
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.101
H-Index - 67
eISSN - 1460-6984
pISSN - 1368-2822
DOI - 10.1080/13682820701698127
Subject(s) - psychology , desensitization (medicine) , feeling , stuttering , psychotherapist , session (web analytics) , social psychology , developmental psychology , medicine , computer science , receptor , world wide web
Background: Charles Van Riper (1905–94) author, researcher and practitioner, was one of the major contributors to the field of stuttering in the 20th century. His series of Action Therapy videotapes provide a useful model of how therapy was implemented by a master clinician. Aims: Van Riper's session with a client is analysed to reveal how voices are used by these two participants during desensitization therapy, and to demonstrate how Van Riper's expertise manifests itself during the session. Methods & Procedures: Interaction between Van Riper and a client during the desensitization stage of therapy was transcribed, annotated, and analysed using Goffman's (1974) frame analysis. Elements in the extensive discourse (about 4800 words exchanged) were chosen to illustrate a range of distinctive voices used by Van Riper and the client during this ‘crucial’ stage of therapy. Outcomes & Results: Van Riper shifts his voice throughout the session. His comments are sometimes directed to the viewing audience, at which times he tends to use the voice of an exegeter. When directing his comments to the client, he uses two voices: an authoritative one and one that aligns with the person's feelings. The voice of the client is often silenced, especially when Van Riper is being authoritative. Sometimes Van Riper uses his expertise by speaking through the voice of the client. This is especially true when summarizing what the client might be feeling. The true voice of the client emerges only occasionally. Detailed discourse analysis focusing on the roles played by participants as revealed through footings taken by speakers show complexity in the interaction that is not obvious at surface level. Conclusions : By using discourse analysis, the multiple voices that Van Riper uses to achieve the complex tasks involved in desensitization can be specified.