Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40143941›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychology2024

Management of divergent stances as a resource to maintain progressivity and social relationships.

Aija Logren, Sakari Ilomäki, Johanna Ruusuvuori

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Aija Logren *Department of Social Sciences, Faculty of Social Sciences and Business Studies, University of Eastern Finland, Kuopio, Finland.
Sakari Ilomäki *Faculty of Social Sciences, Tampere University, Tampere, Finland.
Johanna Ruusuvuori *Faculty of Social Sciences, Tampere University, Tampere, Finland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Previous studies have shown the intersubjective and negotiable nature of stance: interlocutors orient to alignment and adjust their stances to achieve closer alignment. In this article, we study the interplay of three axes of stance-epistemic, deontic and affective stance-and the role their management may have in socially relevant tasks. We describe how the three axes can be simultaneously relevant, taken into account, and dynamically shifted by the participants in a specific sequence of action. The three axes are not always equally aligned or disaligned, but instead divergent: some are aligned at the same time when others are disaligned. Through a case study with two data excerpts, we show how the divergence is an interlocutors' resource to overcome the disalignment of some of the stances, and to eventually achieve sufficient alignment in order to proceed their activity. Our data are drawn from the institutional context of neurological consultations. We examine the interactants' stance over longer episodes of talk to illustrate their momentary, multimodal interactional work to display and adjust their stances. The interactants deploy different modalities to address the divergent stances, and further, the multimodal and multifaceted nature of turns enable them to orient to several axes of stance at the same time. Instead of merely taking a stance, the interlocutors

Indexed as

affectasymmetrydeonticsdivergenceepistemicsmanagement of stancestance-taking

Identifiers

PMID40143941
PMCPMC11937953

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.