The Duplicity of Testimonial Interviews—Unfolding and Utilising Multiple Temporalisation in Compound Procedures and Projects

  • Thomas Scheffer Goethe University, Frankfurt/Main
Keywords: duplicity, speech production, speech reception, conversation analysis, discourse analysis, trans-sequential analysis, temporalisation, forensic interrogation, qualitative interviews

Abstract

This article inquires the relevancy of multiple temporalisations for the discourse analysis of testimonial interviews. Step by step and by help of a range of empirical cases, the author widens the analytical scope (from questions, lines of questions, to supported interrogation by help of files and archives). He does so in order to reconstruct the efficient resources and means of forensic and administrative interrogations. The interviews turn out to be most powerful once they establish duplicity, meaning a partial separation of speech-production and speech-reception. Conclusively the author argues for a symmetrical view on scientific (qualitative) interviews and forensic interrogation. The separation of production and reception is widely ignored in qualitative methods. URN: urn:nbn:de:0114-fqs0701159

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biography

Thomas Scheffer, Goethe University, Frankfurt/Main
Thomas SCHEFFER is lead reseracher of the Emmy-Noether Group "Comparative Microsociology of Criminal Proceedings" at FU Berlin. He studied sociology in Bielefeld and Osnabrück. He conducted ethnographic research on public administration in Eastern Germany, on the asylum procedure, and on the criminal law system in England. His research interests cover micro-sociology, discourse analysis, sequential methods, and the connections of temporality and materiality.
Published
2007-01-31
How to Cite
Scheffer, T. (2007). The Duplicity of Testimonial Interviews—Unfolding and Utilising Multiple Temporalisation in Compound Procedures and Projects. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung / Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 8(1). https://doi.org/10.17169/fqs-8.1.205
Section
Thematic Issue