![Sample our Language & Literature journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5941/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Language-Literature.jpg"})
Abstract
Simulation training is a widely used educational modality for both technical and non-technical skills and provides a safe environment for trainees to practise these skills. However, research into simulation training for communication in other institutional settings has found that simulations are not reflective of actual interactional or communicative practices. Clinical simulation research has also found that issues of authenticity impact on performance in simulations. Using conversation analysis, we compare what norms participants orient to in simulated versus actual surgeon–patient interactions. By doing so, we have identified differences between these interactions. In this article we focus on the ways actors present their problems differently to patients, how they manage the transition to history taking, and how they account for their visit to the doctor.
Notes
* This work was supported by Macquarie University through the Innovation and Scholarship Program. The authors wish to thank the patients, families, actors and doctors who gave their time for this study. The authors wish to thank Professor John Cartmill for his input, as well as Dean Thompson and Erin Lynch who have worked as research assistants on this project.
1Previous research into problem presentation in clinic-based surgeon–patient interactions noted that the structure followed that of acute primary care, however it did not enumerate whether there was a trend toward narrative problem presentation as opposed to symptom-only (White Citation2011).