Showing knowing

Abstract

Purpose: This article examines how persons with intellectual disabilities and professionals working with them manage interactionally challenging situations in which they negotiate epistemic authority. In each situation, the topic of the talk concerns something the person with intellectual disability knows best, such as their plans and hopes. Persons with intellectual disabilities are, thus, expected to show more knowledge about the topic than the professionals. Method: The database for this study consisted of qualitative analysis of 16 videorecorded dyadic conversations between 12 persons with intellectual disabilities and 11 professional co-participants. The methodological approach taken was conversation analysis. Results. Epistemic negotiations turned out to be quite difficult for the interactants. In these situations, the professionals resorted to three practices called renewed requests for confirmations, indirect challenging, and open challenge, which had different impacts on the epistemic authority and full participation of the persons with intellectual disabilities. Discussion and conclusion: None of the practices proved to be unequivocally better or worse than the others, but all had features that seemed both to strengthen and to weaken full participation. The results of the study can also be used to foster professionals’ practical knowledge of how to deal with interactionally challenging situations in conversations with their clients.