Search PubMed⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 6733662

Improving interviewing techniques through the bug-in-the-ear.

J T Salvendy
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

The author describes a simple, efficient and inexpensive tool to improve and accelerate the teaching of interviewing techniques. There are major advantages and some shortcomings to this method. Both are reviewed along with a survey carried out to gauge the experiences of psychiatric residency training programs across the continent with the "bug-in-the-ear". The author discusses the implications for residents, supervisors and patients and offers suggestions how to make this approach more available to non-using centers.

Explore related subjects

CommunicationHumansInternship, NonmedicalInterview, PsychologicalProfessional-Patient RelationsPsychotherapyJournal Article

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

J T Salvendy. 1984. Improving interviewing techniques through the bug-in-the-ear.. https://doi.org/10.1177/070674378402900404

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2007

Information-sharing among couples considering multifetal pregnancy reduction.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the information-sharing strategies of couples considering fetal reduction, and the impact of these strategies on the chances of encountering hostility in their social networks. DESIGN: Cross-sectional design of semistructured qualitative interviews, coded with respect to sharing strategies and level of personally directed hostility encountered. SETTING: Multiple Pregnancy Management Program, Comprehensive Genetics, New York, New York. PATIENT(S) AND INTERVENTION(S): Fifty women and their partners who were making a first visit to our maternal-fetal management facility, in order to consider the possibility of multifetal reduction as a pregnancy-management strategy. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Development of information-sharing strategies, and the chances of encountering personally directed hostility regarding multifetal reduction associated with more and less selective strategies. RESULT(S): Four information-sharing strategies emerged from the analysis. Two of these strategies were relatively open (extended network, and both parents). Two other strategies were relatively selective (qualified family and friends, and defended relationship). The selective strategies were significantly less likely to encounter to encounter personally directed hostility (odds ratio, 3.88; 95% confidence intervals, 0.87-17.30). CONCLUSION(S): Selective sharing of information for couples considering multifetal prgnancy reduction is a potentially useful strategy for moderating potentially stressful relationships in their social networks. Clinics should find a way of integrating the discussion of selective sharing into their clinic's cultural repertoire of patient-support services.

Communication↗