Home > Research > Publications & Outputs > Risk and face: a review of the six studies.
View graph of relations

Risk and face: a review of the six studies.

Research output: Contribution to Journal/MagazineJournal articlepeer-review

Published

Standard

Risk and face: a review of the six studies. / Myers, Greg.
In: Health, Risk and Society, Vol. 5, No. 2, 07.2003, p. 216-220.

Research output: Contribution to Journal/MagazineJournal articlepeer-review

Harvard

Myers, G 2003, 'Risk and face: a review of the six studies.', Health, Risk and Society, vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 216-220. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369857031000123984

APA

Vancouver

Myers G. Risk and face: a review of the six studies. Health, Risk and Society. 2003 Jul;5(2):216-220. doi: 10.1080/1369857031000123984

Author

Myers, Greg. / Risk and face: a review of the six studies. In: Health, Risk and Society. 2003 ; Vol. 5, No. 2. pp. 216-220.

Bibtex

@article{23c4387529a34df39033a5766dcdd838,
title = "Risk and face: a review of the six studies.",
abstract = "My commentary draws on the six studies contained in this special issue to argue that talk about risk poses special problems for interaction, and that the participants in this talk have devices for dealing with these problems. I draw on Erving Goffman's concept of 'face' and show how the discussion of risk issues can threaten the face of doctors and patients, counsellors and clients, or writers and readers of diary accounts and newsgroup postings. The participants are not just presenting an evaluation of probabilities and dangers, they are representing and defending versions of themselves. Another of Goffman's concepts, 'frames', can help us see how each of these discussions can be seen in terms of several different ways of talking, not just calculation of risks and decision-making. The implication is that professionals engaging in risk talk cannot just convey relevant information, but must consider how the participants present themselves, and what different frames might emerge in the course of interaction.",
author = "Greg Myers",
year = "2003",
month = jul,
doi = "10.1080/1369857031000123984",
language = "English",
volume = "5",
pages = "216--220",
journal = "Health, Risk and Society",
issn = "1369-8575",
publisher = "Routledge",
number = "2",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Risk and face: a review of the six studies.

AU - Myers, Greg

PY - 2003/7

Y1 - 2003/7

N2 - My commentary draws on the six studies contained in this special issue to argue that talk about risk poses special problems for interaction, and that the participants in this talk have devices for dealing with these problems. I draw on Erving Goffman's concept of 'face' and show how the discussion of risk issues can threaten the face of doctors and patients, counsellors and clients, or writers and readers of diary accounts and newsgroup postings. The participants are not just presenting an evaluation of probabilities and dangers, they are representing and defending versions of themselves. Another of Goffman's concepts, 'frames', can help us see how each of these discussions can be seen in terms of several different ways of talking, not just calculation of risks and decision-making. The implication is that professionals engaging in risk talk cannot just convey relevant information, but must consider how the participants present themselves, and what different frames might emerge in the course of interaction.

AB - My commentary draws on the six studies contained in this special issue to argue that talk about risk poses special problems for interaction, and that the participants in this talk have devices for dealing with these problems. I draw on Erving Goffman's concept of 'face' and show how the discussion of risk issues can threaten the face of doctors and patients, counsellors and clients, or writers and readers of diary accounts and newsgroup postings. The participants are not just presenting an evaluation of probabilities and dangers, they are representing and defending versions of themselves. Another of Goffman's concepts, 'frames', can help us see how each of these discussions can be seen in terms of several different ways of talking, not just calculation of risks and decision-making. The implication is that professionals engaging in risk talk cannot just convey relevant information, but must consider how the participants present themselves, and what different frames might emerge in the course of interaction.

U2 - 10.1080/1369857031000123984

DO - 10.1080/1369857031000123984

M3 - Journal article

VL - 5

SP - 216

EP - 220

JO - Health, Risk and Society

JF - Health, Risk and Society

SN - 1369-8575

IS - 2

ER -