Downgrading Deontic Authority in Open Dialogue Reflection Proposals: A Conversation Analysis

Ben Ong*, Scott Barnes, Niels Buus


Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

27 Downloads (Pure)


The Open Dialogue approach promotes collaboration with clients and families in decisions about the direction of therapy. This creates potential problems for Open Dialogue therapists who seek collaboration but also have responsibility for managing the session. Using conversation analysis, we examined 14 hours of video recordings of Open Dialogue sessions, and specifically how therapists proposed the transition to a reflecting conversation. We found that, when making proposals to reflect, therapists routinely downgrade their deontic authority (i.e., adopt a less powerful, more collaborative position). They did this through framing proposals as interrogatives, providing accounts, and by prefacing their proposals with “I’m wondering”. More heavily downgraded proposals made acceptance less salient, potentially risking transition to the reflection. These findings provide more detail on how theoretical concepts such as “collaboration” and “power” are actually displayed and negotiated in practice and can contribute to a more nuanced understanding of what constitutes Open Dialogue.

TidsskriftFamily Process
Udgave nummer4
Sider (fra-til)1217-1232
StatusUdgivet - dec. 2021


Dyk ned i forskningsemnerne om 'Downgrading Deontic Authority in Open Dialogue Reflection Proposals: A Conversation Analysis'. Sammen danner de et unikt fingeraftryk.