'Doing Questioning' in the Emergency Department (ED).

Eliciting information from patients is fundamental to medical professionals' capacity to deliver good healthcare outcomes in Emergency Departments (EDs). There are different kinds of utterances that "do questioning", and health professionals can variously attend to the medical agenda and the interpersonal aspects of their interactions with those attending the ED in the way that they construct these utterances. We investigate a corpus of ED interactions to determine the prevalence and range of utterances produced by doctors and directed at patients that "do questioning." We developed a questioning utterance typology, informed by previous research on the formulation of such utterances and extended according to observations of our data. We subsequently manually coded 4,355 questioning utterances and report the variety of forms that such utterances can take, considering how these are distributed across doctors at different levels of seniority. We found that doctors at different seniority levels favored similar questioning utterance types and the most frequently used appeared to restrict the contributions of patients. We conclude that our extended typology of questioning utterances has value for understanding the ways in which doctors may encourage patients to provide more extensive responses.

A linguistic approach to the psychosis continuum: (dis)similarities and (dis)continuities in how clinical and non-clinical voice-hearers talk about their voices.

Introduction: "Continuum" approaches to psychosis have generated reports of similarities and differences in voice-hearing in clinical and non-clinical populations at the cohort level, but not typically examined overlap or degrees of difference between groups. Methods: We used a computer-aided linguistic approach to explore reports of voice-hearing by a clinical group (Early Intervention in Psychosis service-users; N = 40) and a non-clinical group (spiritualists; N = 27). We identify semantic categories of terms statistically overused by one group compared with the other, and by each group compared to a control sample of non-voice-hearing interview data (log likelihood (LL) value 6.63+=p < .01; effect size measure: log ratio 1.0+). We consider whether individual values support a continuum model. Results: Notwithstanding significant cohort-level differences, there was considerable continuity in language use. Reports of negative affect were prominent in both groups (p < .01, log ratio: 1.12+). Challenges of cognitive control were also evident in both cohorts, with references to "disengagement" accentuated in service-users (p < .01, log ratio: 1.14+). Conclusion: A corpus linguistic approach to voice-hearing provides new evidence of differences between clinical and non-clinical groups. Variability at the individual level provides substantial evidence of continuity with implications for cognitive mechanisms underlying voice-hearing.

How certain is 'certain'? Exploring how the English-language media reported the use of calibrated language in the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's Fifth Assessment Report.

This article presents findings from an analysis of English-language media reports following the publication of the fifth Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Assessment Report in September 2013. Focusing on the way they reported the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's use of 'calibrated' language, we find that of 1906 articles relating to the issuing of the report only 272 articles (14.27%) convey the use of a deliberate and systematic verbal scale. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's carefully calibrated language was rarely discussed or explicated, but in some instances scientists, political actors or journalists would attempt to contextualise or elaborate on the reported findings by using analogies to other scientific principles or examples of taking action despite uncertainty. We consider those analogies in terms of their efficacy in communicating (un)certainty.