Cover not available
Article published In:
Pragmatics
Vol. 34:2 (2024) ► pp.190–214

Requests for concrete actions in interaction

How support workers manage client participation in mental health rehabilitation

ORCID logo | Tampere University
ORCID logo | University of Turku
ORCID logo | Tampere University
ORCID logo | Finnish Institute of Occupational Health | University of Helsinki
| University of Helsinki
In this study, we examine how support workers produce requests for concrete actions and, in this way, manage client participation in mental health rehabilitation. Drawing on Finnish rehabilitation group meetings as data and on conversation analysis, we examine how support workers design their requests for concrete action from clients, how clients respond, and how support workers deal with clients’ responses. The results reveal that support workers tend to use verbs indicating willingness when implementing their requests, whereas clients resort to the modality of possibility. By orienting to willingness, the support workers invoke clients’ sense of responsibility to contribute to group activities and simultaneously avoid questioning their capabilities. On the other hand, clients orient toward the underlying assumptions of social responsibility rather than to their own personal preferences. To conclude, our study demonstrates how support workers address the dilemma of increasing client participation and showing respect for client self-determination.
Keywords: conversation analysis, interaction, mental health rehabilitation, participation, requests, modal verbs
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Request as social action
  • 3.Compliance, resistance, and reluctance
  • 4.Data and methods
  • 5.Ethical considerations
  • 6.Results
    • 6.1Requests and client compliance
    • 6.2Requests and client resistance
  • 7.Discussion
  • Glossing abbreviations
  • References
Published online: 16 May 2023
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/prag.20077.lin
References (64)
References
Anthony, William A. 2007. Toward a Vision of Recovery: For Mental Health and Psychiatric Rehabilitation Services. Boston: Boston University Press.Google Scholar
Austin, John L. 1962. How to Do Things with Words. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Bensing, Jozien. 2000. “Bridging the Gap: The Separate Worlds of Evidence-Based Medicine and Patient-Centered Medicine.” Patient Education and Counseling 39 (1): 17–25. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bilmes, Jack. 1988. “The Concept of Preference in Conversation Analysis.” Language in Society 171: 161–181. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brodie, Ellie, Eddie Cowling, Nina Nissen, Angela E. Paine, Véronique Jochum, and Diane Warburton. 2009. Understanding Participation: A Literature Review. National Council for Voluntary Organisations. Retrieved from [URL]
Brown, Penelope, and Stephen Levinson. 1987 [1978]. Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Clayman, Steven E. 2002. “Sequence and Solidarity.” In Advances in Group Processes: Group Cohesion, Trust, and Solidarity, edited by Shane R. Thye, and Edward J. Lawler, 229–253. Oxford, UK: Elsevier Science. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Clayman, Steven E., and John Heritage. 2014. “Benefactors and Beneficiaries: Benefactive Status and Stance in the Management of Offers and Requests.” In Requesting in Social Interaction, edited by Paul Drew, and Elizabeth Couper-Kuhlen, 51–82.Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Clubhouse International. 2018. [URL]
Couper-Kuhlen, Elizabeth. 2014. “What Does Grammar Tell Us about Action?” Pragmatics 24 (3): 623–647.Google Scholar
Couper-Kuhlen, Elizabeth, and Marja Etelämäki. 2015. “Nominated Actions and Their Targeted Agents in Finnish Conversational Directives.” Journal of Pragmatics 781: 7–24. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Corrigan, Patrick W., Dale Faber, Fadwa Rashid, and Matthew Leary. 1999. “The Construct Validity of Empowerment among Consumers of Mental Health Services.” Schizophrenia Research 38 (1): 77–84. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cowan, Eric W., and Jack H. Presbury. 2000. “Meeting Client Resistance and Reactance with Reverence.” Journal of Counseling & Development 78 (4): 411–419. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cromdal, Jakob, Michael Tholander, and Karin Aronsson. 2007. “‘Doing Reluctance’: Managing Delivery of Assessments in Peer Evaluation.” In Discursive Research in Practice: New Approaches to Psychology and Interaction, edited by Sally Wiggins, and Alexa Hepburn, 203–223. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Curl, Traci S., and Paul Drew. 2008. “Contingency and Action: A Comparison of Two Forms of Requesting.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 41 (2): 129–153. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Davidson, Judy A. 1984. “Subsequent Versions of Invitations, Offers, Requests, and Proposals Dealing with Potential or Actual Rejection.” In Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis, edited by J. Maxwell Atkinson, and John Heritage, 102–128. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
De las Cuevas, Carlos, Amado Rivero-Santana, Lilisbeth Perestelo-Pérez, Jeanette Pérez-Ramos, and Pedro Serrano-Aguilar. 2012. “Attitudes Toward Concordance in Psychiatry: A Comparative, Cross-Sectional Study of Psychiatric Patients and Mental Health Professionals.” BMC Psychiatry 12, 53. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Elstad, Toril A., and Arne H. Eide. 2009. “User Participation in Community Mental Health Services: Exploring the Experiences of Users and Professionals.” Scandinavian Journal of Caring Science 23 (4): 674–681. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ervin-Tripp, Susan. 1976. “Is Sybil There? The Structure of Some American English Directives.” Language in Society 5 (1): 25–66. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Framework for Recovery-Oriented Practice. 2011. “Health, Drugs and Regions Division, Victorian Government Department of Health, Melbourne.” Retrieved 25.2.2018 from [URL]
Goffman, Erving. 1955. “On Face Work. An Analysis of Ritual Elements in Social Interaction.” Psychiatry 18 (3): 213–231. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goossensen, Anne, Paula Zijlstra, and Marc Koopmanschap. 2007. “Measuring Shared Decision Making Processes in Psychiatry: Skills versus Patient Satisfaction.” Patient Education and Counseling 67 (1): 50–56. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hakulinen, Auli, Maria Vilkuna, Riitta Korhonen, Vesa Koivisto, Tarja-Riitta Heinonen, and Irja Alho. 2004. Iso suomen kielioppi [Descriptive grammar of Finnish]. Helsinki: Finnish Literature Society. Online version (2008), [URL].Google Scholar
Harjunpää, Katariina. 2021. “Brokering Co-participants’ Volition in Request and Offer Sequences.” In Intersubjectivity in Action, edited by Jan Lindström, Ritva Laury, Anssi Peräkylä, and Marja-Leena Sorjonen, 135–159. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heinemann, Trine. 2006. “‘Will You or Can’t You?’: Displaying Entitlement in Interrogative Requests.” Journal of Pragmatics 381: 1081–1104. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heritage, John, and Geoffrey T. Raymond. 2012. “Navigating Epistemic Landscapes: Acquiescence, Agency and Resistance in Responses to Polar Questions.” In Questions: Formal, Functional and Interactional Perspectives, edited by Jan P. de Ruiter, 179–192. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heritage, John. 1984. Garfinkel and Ethnomethodology. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Hibbard, Judith H., and Jessica Greene. 2013. “What the Evidence Shows about Patient Activation: Better Health Outcomes and Care Experiences; Fewer Data on Costs.” Health Affairs 32 (2): 207–214. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hickey, Gary, and Cheryl Kipping. 1998. “Exploring the Concept of User Involvement in Mental Health through a Participation Continuum.” Journal of Clinical Nursing 7 (1): 83–88. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hollin, Gregory, and Alison Pilnick. 2018. “The Categorisation of Resistance: Interpreting Failure to Follow a Proposed Line of Action in the Diagnosis of Autism amongst Young Adults.” Sociology of Health & Illness 40 (7): 1215–1232. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hänninen, Esko. 2012. Choices for Recovery: Community-Based Rehabilitation and the Clubhouse Model as Means to Mental Health Reforms. THL-raportteja, 50/2012. Tampere: Tampere University Print Oy.Google Scholar
Kangasniemi, Heikki. 1992. Modal Expressions in Finnish. Helsinki: Finnish Literature Society (SKS).Google Scholar
Kent, Alexandra. 2012. “Compliance, Resistance and Incipient Compliance When Responding to Directives.” Discourse Studies 14 (6): 711–770. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kirby, Michael J. L., and Wilbert J. Keon. 2006. Out of the Shadows at Last. Transforming Mental Health, Mental Illness and Addiction Services in Canada. Final Report of the Standing Committee on Social Affairs, Science and Technology, Senate of Canada, Ottawa.Google Scholar
Kotthoff, Helga. 1993. “Disagreement and Concession in Disputes: On the Context Sensitivity of Preference Structures.” Language in Society 22 (2): 193–216. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lehmann, Christian. 1982. “Directions for Interlinear Morphemic Translations.” Folia Linguistica 16 (1–4): 199–224. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Leipzig Glossing Rules. 2020. “Conventions for Interlinear Morpheme-by-Morpheme Glosses.” Max Planck Institute, Department of Linguistics. Online: [URL]
Lindström, Anna. 1999. Language as Social Action: Grammar, Prosody, and Interaction in Swedish Conversation: grammatik, prosodi och interaktion i svenska samtal. Uppsala: Uppsala University.Google Scholar
Linell, Per, Johan Hofvendahl, and Camilla Lindholm. 2003. “Multi-Unit Questions in Institutional Interactions: Sequential Organizations and Communicative Functions.” Text 231: 539–571.Google Scholar
Newman, Cory F. 1994. “Understanding Client Resistance: Methods for Enhancing Motivation to Change.” Cognitive and Behavioral Practice 1 (1): 47–69. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ochs, Elinor, Emanuel. A. Schegloff, and Sandra A. Thompson, eds. 1996. Interaction and Grammar. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Parker, Sophia. 2007. “Participation: A New Operating System for Public Services?” In Participation Nation: Reconnecting Citizens to the Public Realm, edited by Stella Creasy, 103–112. London: Involve.Google Scholar
Peräkylä, Anssi. 2013. “Conversation Analysis in Psychotherapy.” In Handbook of Conversation Analysis, edited by Jack Sidnell, and Tanya Stivers, 551–574. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pomerantz, Anita. 1984. “Agreeing and Disagreeing with Assessments: Some Features of Preferred/Dispreferred Turn Shapes.” In Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis, edited by J. Maxwell Atkinson, and John Heritage, 57–101. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Pomerantz, Anita, and John Heritage. 2013. “Preference.” In Handbook of Conversation Analysis, edited by Jack Sidnell, and Tanya Stivers, 210–228. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Royal College of Psychiatrists Social Inclusion Scoping Group. 2009. Mental Health and Social Inclusion. Making Psychiatry and Mental Health Services Fit for the 21st Century. Position statement. Retrieved from [URL]
Raevaara, Liisa. 2017. “Adjusting the Design of Directives to the Activity Environment. Imperatives in Finnish Cooking Club Interaction.” In Imperative Turns at Talk: The Design of Directives in Action, edited by Marja-Leena Sorjonen, Liisa Raevaara, and Elizabeth Couper-Kuhlen, 381–410. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schegloff, Emanuel A. 2007. Sequence Organization in Interaction. A Primer in Conversation Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rossi, Giovanni. 2015. “The Request System in Italian Interaction.” PhD dissertation, Radboud University Nijmegen.
Sacks, Harvey. 1987 [1973]. “On the Preferences for Agreement and Contiguity in Sequences in Conversation.” In Talk and Social Organisation, edited by Graham Button, and J. R. E. Lee, 54–69. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Searle, John R. 1969. Speech Acts: An Essay in the Philosophy of Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1976. “A Classification of Illocutionary Acts.” Language in Society 5 (1): 1–23. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sorjonen, Marja-Leena. 2001. Responding in Conversation: A Study of Response Particles in Finnish. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Shaw, Rebecca, and Celia Kitzinger. 2012. “Compliments on a Home Birth Helpline.” Research on Language & Social Interaction 45 (3): 213–244. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Steensig, Jakob, and Trine Heinemann. 2014. “The Social and Moral Work of Modal Constructions in Granting Remote Requests.” In Requesting in Social Interaction, edited by Paul Drew, and Elizabeth Couper-Kuhlen, 141–166. John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stevanovic, Melisa. 2012. “Establishing Joint Decisions in a Dyad.” Discourse Studies 14 (6): 779–803. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stevanovic, Melisa, and Chiara Monzoni. 2016. “On the Hierarchy of Interactional Resources: Embodied and Verbal Behavior in the Management of Joint Activities with Material Objects.” Journal of Pragmatics 1031: 15–32. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stevanovic, Melisa, and Anssi Peräkylä. 2012. “Deontic Authority in Interaction: The Right to Announce, Propose and Decide.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 45 (3): 297–321. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stevanovic, Melisa, Taina Valkeapää, Elina Weiste, and Camilla Lindholm. 2022. “Joint Decision Making in a Mental Health Rehabilitation Community: The Impact of Support Workers’ Proposal Design on Client Responsiveness.” Counselling Psychology Quarterly 35 (1): 129–154. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stivers, Tanya. 2005. “Parent Resistance to Physicians’ Treatment Recommendations: One Resource for Initiating a Negotiation of the Treatment Decision.” Health Communication 18 (1): 41–74. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stivers, Tanya, and Makoto Hayashi. 2010. “Transformative Answers: One Way to Resist a Question’s Constraints.” Language in Society 39 (1): 1–25. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Waring, Hansun Z. 2007. “Complex Advice Acceptance as a Resource for Managing Asymmetries.” Text & Talk 27 (1): 107–137. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Weiste, Elina, Camilla Lindholm, Taina Valkeapää, and Melisa Stevanovic. 2021. “Interactional Use of Compliments in Mental Health Rehabilitation.” Journal of Pragmatics 1771: 224–236. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
WHO – Europe. 2010. “User Empowerment in Mental Health – A Statement by the WHO Regional Office for Europe.” Retrieved from [URL]
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

Yang, Xin, Zhengjun Wang, Xinzheng Wang, Yajing Wen, Yingxin Du & Fengchun Ji
2024. Study on Mechanical Properties of Nano-TiC- and Nano-SiO2-Modified Basalt Fiber Concrete. Buildings 14:7 ► pp. 2120 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 21 september 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.