Winterbottom2026
| Winterbottom2026 | |
|---|---|
| BibType | ARTICLE |
| Key | Winterbottom2025 |
| Author(s) | Phineas Edwin Winterbottom, Andrea Bruun, Steven Bloch |
| Title | Breaking the rules: A conversation analytic study of hospice multidisciplinary team meetings |
| Editor(s) | |
| Tag(s) | EMCA, Rules, Conversation analysis, Hospice, Multidisciplinary teams, In press |
| Publisher | |
| Year | 2025 |
| Language | English |
| City | |
| Month | |
| Journal | Discourse Studies |
| Volume | |
| Number | |
| Pages | |
| URL | Link |
| DOI | 10.1177/14614456251344039 |
| ISBN | |
| Organization | |
| Institution | |
| School | |
| Type | |
| Edition | |
| Series | |
| Howpublished | |
| Book title | |
| Chapter | |
Abstract
Rule-breaking occurs in healthcare settings and is typically pro-social. However, rule-breaking within a hospice setting has not been previously studied. This study investigates rule-breaking within hospice multidisciplinary team (MDT) meetings using Conversation Analysis. Eight video and audio recordings of approximately 45-minute-long MDT meetings at one UK hospice were systematically analysed to identify how staff break rules. Rule-breaking was present throughout the data and was characterised by the minimisation of accountability through collectivising pronouns, extreme formulations and laughables. These three features supported rule-breakers to voice potentially transgressive opinions and recommendations that may have provoked criticism from MDT members. Rule-breakers were therefore able to evade social and professional sanctions whilst carrying out pro-social actions that benefit hospice patients, meeting participants, as well as the organisation and progression of the meeting itself. These findings contribute to the existing understanding of rule-breaking and have implications for how institutions understand and address it.
Notes
