Premium
The professional construction of ‘paranoia’ and the discursive use of diagnostic criteria
Author(s) -
Harper David J.
Publication year - 1994
Publication title -
british journal of medical psychology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.102
H-Index - 62
eISSN - 2044-8341
pISSN - 0007-1129
DOI - 10.1111/j.2044-8341.1994.tb01779.x
Subject(s) - paranoia , ambiguity , rhetorical question , legitimacy , discourse analysis , psychology , meaning (existential) , relation (database) , social psychology , mental health , epistemology , sociology , psychoanalysis , psychotherapist , linguistics , law , political science , politics , philosophy , database , computer science
This study examined the ways in which five mental health professionals talked about paranoia. A discourse analysis (Potter & Wetherell, 1987) suggested that interviewees positioned themselves, and were themselves positioned, by a number of discourses, or systematic ways of talking, in relation to this topic. These discourses appeared to serve a number of functions including the maintenance of professional legitimacy. Interviewees used a number of rhetorical strategies (including exploiting the range and ambiguity of diagnostic definitions, criteria and theories) in order to meet challenges, for example that paranoid beliefs might be true.