ArticlePDF Available


Social work practice makes up part of modern people processing organisations. In their role of a person-related service provider, professionals intervene into the life circumstances of a clientele who regularly suffers from emotionally distressing experiences and critical thresholds of their living conditions. Emotions (one’s own and those of the other) are therefore part of the professionals’ everyday life experiences. Social workers must deal with contingent situations and social relationships frequently shaped by affection and multiple feelings that are only partly predictable. This paper aims to make analytically palpable the mostly ordinary and unobtrusive display of emotional states of the participants during a professional/client encounter. It argues that emotions are pervasively present in the professional/client interaction and that their management is pivotal to realise and secure a stable and resilient working relationship as a bedrock for sustained activities in a series. Based on two longer transcripts of audio-recorded German childcare planning conferences (CPC) referring to residential care it will be shown how feelings and emotions are locally managed in situ supporting the clients’ respect and self-esteem during an institutionally goal-driven meeting even if they do not refer to them in an explicit or verbal kind. For free e-online copies:
Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at
Journal of Social Work Practice
Psychotherapeutic Approaches in Health, Welfare and the Community
ISSN: 0265-0533 (Print) 1465-3885 (Online) Journal homepage:
Doing emotion. Emotion management in German
child care planning conferences
Heinz Messmer
To cite this article: Heinz Messmer (2019) Doing emotion. Emotion management in German child
care planning conferences, Journal of Social Work Practice, 33:4, 403-418
To link to this article:
Published online: 21 Nov 2019.
Submit your article to this journal
View related articles
View Crossmark data
Doing emotion. Emotion management in German child care
planning conferences
Heinz Messmer
School of Social Work, Institute for Studies in Children and Youth Services, University of Applied Sciences
and Arts, Switzerland
Social work practice makes up part of modern people processing
organisations. In their role of a person-related service provider, pro-
fessionals intervene into the life circumstances of a clientele
who regularly suers from emotionally distressing experiences and
critical thresholds of their living conditions. Emotions (ones own and
those of the other) are therefore part of the professionalseveryday
life experiences. Social workers must deal with contingent situations
and social relationships frequently shaped by aection and multiple
feelings that are only partly predictable. This paper aims to make
analytically palpable the mostly ordinary and unobtrusive display of
emotional states of the participants during a professional/client
encounter. It argues that emotions are pervasively present in the
professional/client interaction and that their management is pivotal
to realise and secure a stable and resilient working relationship as
a bedrock for sustained activities in a series. Based on two longer
transcripts of audio-recorded German childcare planning confer-
ences (CPC) referring to residential care it will be shown how feelings
and emotions are locally managed in situ supporting the clients
respect and self-esteem during an institutionally goal-driven meeting
even if they do not refer to them in an explicit or verbal kind.
Child care planning
conferences; social work
practice; emotion
management; conversation
analysis; professional/client-
Introduction: social work practice seen from a micro analytic perspective
One of the basic assumptions of this paper refers to professional social work practice seen as
an essentially locally co-produced and interactive activity. Observing social workers during
their daily work, we would see them talking on the phone, reading, writing or completing
reports, fostering contact with clients, gathering relevant information and attending to their
needs, coordinating and planning further steps and so on and so forth. In short, what we
can see is that social work practice is essentially concerned with what White (1999,p.89)
once called establishing caseness. According to Bergmann (2014,p.424),acaseisthe
compressed narrativeof a professional activity that crosses the boundaries of institutional
case processing and overlapping dierent reality zones.
Seen from a micro analytic perspective, the fundamental activities of social work
practice appear sound, rational and consensual while the prerequisites of their manu-
facturing widely remain unexplored. For about two decades, though, there has been
CONTACT Heinz Messmer
2019, VOL. 33, NO. 4, 403418
© 2019 GAPS
a marked increase in examining the conditions for practical activities in professional
social work. Although there have been some pioneers who have previously dealt with the
interactive, procedural and communicative requirements of social work practice (e.g.
Baldock & Prior, 1981; Pithouse & Atkinson, 1988), an international scientic discourse
has emerged just in the last two decades (cf. Hall, Juhila, Matarese, & Van Nijnatten,
2014; Hall, Slembrouck, & Sarangi, 2006).
Subsequently to this, the following investigations refer to real interactions and activities,
i.e. processes and practices collected and documented in the moment of their making. Based
on two longer excerpts from audio-taped childcare planning conferences (CPC) on residen-
tial care it will be shown how and why participants refer to emotions and what consequences
their display may have for the setting at hand. The aim of this analysis is not to give a complete
picture about all conceivable emotional states and functions. Instead, it gives an impression of
how deeply the display of emotion permeates the professional/client encounter and how far-
reaching the consequences are in terms of the objectives of the professional setting.
In a rst step, conceptual issues with reference to emotional expressions will be claried
necessary to identify even the less obvious expressions of an emotional stance in an
empirically reliable way. Additionally, we primarily refer to research that treats emotions
less as an individual internal state than as an interactive quality aecting the activities to deal
with. In a third step, we outline data, methods and objectives of this study as far as necessary
for the subsequent sections. Those will deal with two longer excerpts concerning the pre-
beginning and reporting phase of the CPC Janetindexing the relevance of the context
while processing the case emotionally. The nal section discusses the empirical ndings
primarily in the context of an interactional asymmetry. It is argued that emotion manage-
ment reects the tension between establishing caseness(by means of categorisations)
without, if possible, violating feelings of self-respect and self-esteem of the aected client.
On the concept of feelings and emotions
Emotions, as Nussbaum (2001, p. 1) puts it, denote the map of our mental and human
existence. In social interaction, hardly any activity remains emotionally unaccompanied or
unaected in an either positive or negative way. Feelings and emotions mark the individuals
experience and states of arousal opposite to the social environment in which they take part.
According to this, they are contingent, dissimilar and diverse in that they reect the indivi-
duals understanding and assessment. While, for instance, distinct issues may cause fear, joy,
or indierence in ones own perceptual framework, they may stimulate completely dierent
feelings in that of the other. A review of relevant research (Plutchik, 2001) indicates that
feelings primarily refer to the individuals bodily sensomotoric systemarousingeitherpleasant
or unpleasant sensations (or a mix of both). Such states, however, are regularly superimposed
by sense-making needs and interpretations. An indeterminate turmoil of the stomach, for
instance, may indicate the consequences of an unbalanced diet, a nervous disease, or a mental
overload, giving rise for quite dierent explanations and subsequent actions.
On the other hand, such evaluations of inner states are themselves the outcome of
cultural patterns providing reasonable answers of the persons internal state. Individuals
regularly face rules and expectations regarding the display of socially preferred feelings
(e.g. expressions of mourning at a funeral) while others are clearly dispreferred (e.g.
humour and jokes in a similar context). Socially established feeling rules are both
situations bound and structured by social and cultural regulations (cf. Hochschild, 1983;
Nussbaum, 2001) supporting a reliable interactional frame while avoiding disruptions
and other disturbances.
To begin with, it might be helpful to make clear what we are talking about. First, we
suggest a distinction between aect and feeling. Aects seem to designate the basic states
of inner arousal triggered by bodily sensations that cannot (or only partly) be inuenced
by the persons consciousness (for instance, joy, fear, disgust, surprise, cf. Tomkins,
1982). Aects typically appear in a bipolar manner causing either pleasant or unpleasant
feelings that give raise to relaxations or tensions concerning ones own evaluative stance.
Accordingly, aects are frequently accompanied by spontaneous bodily or mimic ges-
tures (sweating, blushing, facial expressions of disgust, joy, anxiety, rage etc.) indicating
a persons assessment in a nonverbal kind (Zajonc, 1984).
While aects seem to portray elemental, innate and universal bodily conditions (cf.
Darwin, 1873), feelings are sensory impressions that dier insofar from aect, as they are
not necessarily dependent on a situational trigger. Feelings are viewed vis-à-vis their
bridging function between body and mind (Denzin, 1980, p. 253). As blind forces
(Nussbaum, 2001, p. 11) they are basically indierent claiming for judgemental evalua-
tions. Disturbing feelings of the bride reecting on her absent groom during her wedding
ceremony may change dramatically if there is a reasonable account for the grooms
absence (he is delayed because of a trac jam) with reference to the trigger (the groom
does not show up). In an analogous way, Simmel (1984, p. 21) denes feelings as
evaluations of peripheral responses(authors translation), Nussbaum (2001)asvalue
judgment(p. 4) and evaluative thought(p. 11).
Finally, we use the term emotion as reecting the display of aect and feeling with
reference to a social encounter. According to this, emotions appear as an expression of
feelings while considering the presence of a relevant other. That is, participants usually
reect upon what might be assessed as socially (in-) appropriate relative to the circum-
stances that govern the situation at hand. In a comparable way, Massumi (1995, p. 88,
cited in Ott, 2017, p. 14) denes emotion as a subjective content, the socio-linguistic
xing of the quality of an experience which is from the point onward dened as personal.
Emotion is qualied intensity, the conventional, consensual point of insertion of inten-
sity into semantically and semiotically formed progressions, into narrativisable action-
reaction circuits, into function and meaning. It is intensity owned and recognised.
Hence, emotions are characterised not only by the way what we feel and how we think
about it but also by the context indicating who is responsible, allowed or obligated to
express feelings vis-à-vis the other. That is why Goman (1956,1961) described the
mastery of feelings as a constant interactional task. This contiguity becomes rather
evident in situations of escalated conict, which regularly exhibit an increased level of
aective arousal while the control about the display of negative and socially dispreferred
feelings drop (e.g. anger, rage, frustration, etc.). Accordingly, participants utter their
aective arousal by means of talking increasingly rapidly and loudly, mounting inter-
ruptions and uncompleted sentences while conversely lessening signs of personal estima-
tion and politeness indicating their opposite stance relative to the other.
Research on emotion as practical actions
According to the linguistic turn in philosophy and human sciences, language necessarily
shapes our understanding of reality(Ott, 2017, p. 9). What people say, think and do
greatly depend on their language capacities and is the result of their sense-making
methods. Conversation and discourse analytic approaches investigate feelings and emo-
tions therefore less as an inner-psychological state, but more as a component of a social
practice (Edwards, 1999). Seen from a primarily interactive stance, feelings and emotions
mainly appear as a locally enacted pattern by which participants relate to the organisa-
tional context of the encounter while constantly evaluating their own activities and those
of the others. Research shows that the display of feelings substantiates the ongoing sense-
and decision-making procedures indicating the participantscurrent (dis-)alignments
relative to the variety of protean tasks. Feelings, as Wetherell (2012, p. 13) summarises,
are practical, communicative and organised. From that point of view, the display of
feelings makes up a vital part of the interactional ow, a process at least, that takes place
from moment-to-moment performing and transforming the practices, regulations and
structures of situated social conduct.
In line with such ndings, conversation and discourse analytical research aims to
reconstruct the way in which participants understand and inuence their current situa-
tion and the role their feelings may have. Taking emotions as part of social practice,
Wetherell (2012, p. 24, in line with Burkitt 2002)denes an emotion as a relational
pattern (. . .), a response to a situation and to the world (. . .) Aect is never wholly owned,
always intersecting and interacting.Emotions typically come into play as participants
evaluate objects, actions and persons while positioning themselves relative to the others
and adopt an either neutral, approving or contradictory stance (cf. Du Bois, 2007, p. 169).
Since each interaction is subject to its own sense-making reasoning, emotion displays
can be viewed as transforming a situated action, opening up alternative trajectories for
a sequence in progress, and also functions as actions in themselves(Sandlund, 2004,
Abstract). According to Goodwin, Cekaite, and Goodwin (2012, p. 16), feelings and
emotions are inherent features of temporally unfolding sequences of interaction entailed
in a speakers performance of aective stance.This is also consistent with a basically
constructive perspective, according to which its not so much we have emotions,
a thought, a memory so much as we do them(Gergen, 1999, p. 132, quoted in
Sandlund, 2004, p. 8; emphases in original). As Burkitt (2002) concludes, feelings must
not necessarily verbalise but completed interactively. In fact, there are innite ways to
make them eective.
Data, method and aim of the study
The data for this study derived from a conversation analytical study about negotiations
and decision-making between professionals and clients in the context of German CPC
referring to residential care (cf. Messmer & Hitzler, 2008). CPCs are considered a key
process of service provision in the German Youth Welfare system designed to negotiate
a mutual understanding about the relevant issues at stake. The aim is to reach an
agreement about how to begin, to continue or to end residential care eectively that
similarly meets the needs of the clients as well as the professionalsevaluations on the
situation at hand. Minimally, the relevant child, his or her parents as well as representa-
tives of the youth authorities and the service provider attend the CPC.
The method used for this study is ethnomethodological conversation analysis (CA)
that aims to reconstruct how members of a social setting produce a rule-bound and
orderly structured activity along the ongoing stream of communications between them
(cf. Sacks, 1992). The basic assumption of CA stands for a research perspective that takes
social reality not for granted but rather for socially co-produced and reproduced prac-
tices unveiling the seen-but-unnoticed rules and regularities that govern the situation the
participants refer to. Thus, every utterance made in the CPC setting can be said to be
context shaped as well as context renewing, that is, to foreshadow meaning to come by
drawing from meaning inferred (Heritage, 1984).
Believing that interactions serve as joint attempts to produce and reproduce a shared
social order which is accessible to any competent member of a speech communitythat
is, participants and researchers alikeCA concludes that participants themselves must
observe and analyse their ongoing activities and make these analyses interactively
accessible to each other. Using each others turns as context for the turns to follow,
participants ensure a mutual understanding and perpetuate the ow of the ongoing
interaction, self-reexively knitting a tight net of interactional meaning. One of the
most striking ndings of CA refers to the inconspicuous, unrecognised details and formal
irregularities of the interactions observed that are key to understand the intrinsically
situated order and provide the bedrock for an ongoing activity.
Thus, discussing the question of doing emotion, we aim to investigate two longer
extracts of the CPC Janet (pre-beginning and reporting) more extensively
to illustrate
and understand the interlocking features of the display of emotional states and the
subsequent consequences such communications may haveespecially those that fre-
quently remain hidden and analytically unspecied. Janet is a 14-year-old girl distressed
by a sexual assault (committed by a male adult in an accidental encounter while she was
staying out of home overnight without permission) and troubled by the divorce of her
parents. She is suering from severe depression indicating her anxiety of loss. Previously,
she was sheltered in a juvenile psychiatry department of a medical centre. After various
attempted suicides, she transfers to a structured educational setting that was arranged for
her after several psychiatric assessments. The initial CPC takes place three months after
Janets placement in residential care.
Doing emotion in informal talk: the pre-beginning of the CPC Janet
A pre-beginning is a distinctive feature of institutional group meetings indicating to the
less formal features of the setting. Pre-beginnings will emerge if arriving participants
welcome each other, or if those who have already arrived are waiting for stragglers
bridging the situation with small talk and the exchange of courtesies. Participants make
use of the pre-beginning as a situational warming upthat helps to check their relation-
ship well in advance of the regular start:
CPC Janet 32-84
, today see-
33 I am uh- school has nished,
34 .hh I just wanted to clear my things,
35 and there was this THING-
36 and I am FULLY with my head and I am had FULLY here-
37 softer voice> so I have fully this wound here.>
38 MO: [po:or-
39 SW: [thick BUMp isnt it?
40 CH: laughing> ye:hehes.>
41 MO: po:or child.
42 ?W: ye:ah.
43 SW: [is anything different with your hair today?
44 MO: [(straight away a)-
45 MO: [straight away put a spoon [hair colorant] on it?
46 CH: [yes=s,
47 SF: yes:s.
48 SW: still;=yep?
49 anyhow?
50 CH: boah, its [WARM in here.
51 SF: [has been different before.
52 (2.0)
53 SW: did you again d
54 did you again dye(-)the hair?
55 MO: hm=hm.
56 CH: hm=hm, (sure).
57 SW: but it seems to take (-) [another direction already-
58 CH: [((laughs))
59 SW: or have you dyed your hair in the (-)OPPOsite direction
60 [or-
61 CH: [NO:H. ([
62 HS: [would you like any coffee?
63 SF: Yes, please.
64 ()
65 SW?:((laughs with a deep breath))
66 ()
67 SW: and-
68 no, no milk please.
69 MO: nope.
70 ((a cup is being put down))
71 SW: yes, it IS really warm in here. ((starts laughing))
72 HS: we can leave the door open, I think-
73 there is nobody expected to come.
74 [(would you also like) some coffee?
75 SF: [thank you.
76 IN: (yes please).
77 (noise: coffee dishes)) (5.0)
78 HS: I will open the door immediately,
79 when I have POUred this.
80 ?W: (hm=hm).
81 HS: Janet may I give you-
82 gets a fright> HOOPS->
83 I see that is this (.) modern pot-
84 where immediately ()
At a rst glance, the transcribed communication appears like a mess: uncompleted
words and phrases, paraverbal expressions, interrupted and overlapped i.e. simultaneous
speech, rapid switched and uncompleted topics in talkwhich, however, represents the
empirical features of an ordinary and informal group activity that happens at any time
everywhere in quite similar forms. Likewise, a signicant, unambiguous and clearly
recognisable display of feelings (e.g. fear, rage, anger or sadness) does not show up either,
except occasional pieces of laughter at dierent places. Contrary to such prima facie
impressions, we aim to prove that both the display of emotions as well as apparently less
meaningful and incidental activities play a signicant role launching the prerequisites of
establishing caseness.
The display of self-referential emotions
In the sequence above, self-referential emotions are disclosed primarily by means of
proto-verbal expressions, for instance, when Janet makes known former and present
assessments (line 32: BOAH today, see . . . and line 50: boah, its WARM in here) indexing
her inner state triggered by past (painful sensations) and current events (excessive
climate). In a somewhat more mitigated form, this also applies to HSs fright, when she
seems losing control while pouring the coee (line 82: gets a fright> HOOPS->). Such
responses to aective arousal are impressive and easily to understand because they
elucidate the participantsinner conditions that most people may feel in similar situa-
tions. In addition, this extract comprises various references to bodily sensations which
are explicitly namedfor example Janets above-mentioned statement (it is WARM in
here) as well as the social workers assent (line 71: yes it IS really warm in here <begins
laughing>). The emphasis in both statements (indicated in capital letters: WARM; IS)
eventually point to the strength of their sensations. The same applies to Janets bump of
her head (line 36: FULLY with my head and I had FULLY here- . ..).
Moreover, laughter also earns special attention, as it signals (particularly during an
institutional activity) less humour, fun, or tension release but rather a persons concealed
state of arousal (cf. Mik-Meyer, 2007). In the extract presented above, laughter occurs at
various places. Janet uses it twice a response to SWs antecedent communications (lines
40 and 58) indicating her embarrassment as nothing in SWs prior statements really
comes close to what otherwise might be heard as a joking intent. In addition, twice it is
SW, who, for one, reacts with laughing out of unclear reasons (line 65), next to her
remark about the rooms excessive climate (line 71: yes it IS really warm in here. <begins
laughing>). Again, none of those situations gives evidence for framing SWs laughter as
an expression of humour or fun. Rather, it seems to display the participants inner
tensions, as they possibly do not know how to respond to the experienced feelings
The display of other-referential emotions
Reactions to the feelings of others can be distinguished according to whether they
themselves express feelings or merely comment on them or ignore them. The rst
instance happens only once when Janets mother shows compassion regarding Janets
bump in lines 38 and 41 (po:or child). Although the social worker also comments on
Janets portrayal, she reacts in a quite dierent way rephrasing Janets statement without
any display of her own emotional stance (line 36: thick BUMp, isnt it?). In a comparable
way, the head of the service provider (HS) reacts to Janets and SWs statements
concerning the room climate issue-related expressing her willingness to open the door
immediately (line 72). In contrast, regarding her own fright about the spilled coee (line
82), HS rst reacts aectively (HOOPS), whileafter thatshe dissociates herself
straightaway explaining the trigger (line 83: I see that is that (.) modern pot-) rationalising
what previously was out of control. Thus, professionals seem to be rather reluctant to
reveal their own feelingswhich at the end may also explain SWs laughter mentioned
above with which she (like HS) seems to detach from her own inner states.
Emotions as a proactive device for relationship building
In addition to aectively expressed feelings and related responses, a third group of
emotions can be identied that does not directly express feelings but seems to create
a sense of personal proximity contributing to the well-being of the group members. In
line 43, SW makes Janets hair and outt topical for further discussions. Noting that
Janets hair is arranged dierently than in the meeting before, SW makes herself know-
able as an attentive and interested observer whose concern is directed not only to the case
but to Janet as a person as well. As all participants (except HS and the scientic observer)
subsequently make further comments on this issue, they clearly put Janet in the groups
focus, which on the one hand atters her while it creates again ambivalent feelings (line
58: <laughs>).
Adierent though typical form securing a working relationship is also reected in HS
gestures of hospitality and politeness (line 62: would you like coee?) and related responses
(yes please, thank you). By adhering to dierent conventional forms of courtesy, partici-
pants do not only demonstrate respect for each others activities but create a form of
interactional symmetry in which all participants enjoy equal treatment and rights regard-
less their institutional stance before formal pattern take place (cf. Messmer, 2017).
Emotion management during the developmental report about Janet
While pre-beginnings oer an excellent opportunity for laying informal grounds for
proximity, well-being and aliation before formal structures take place, the step to
a more formal organised activity leads to a signicant shift in the emotion management
as all activities from now on must closely link to the institutional goals of the CPC.
A relevant part of the discussions in a CPC setting is the developmental report of the
service provider. Based on comparisons between the actual (what is) and the ought (what
should be), professionals must refer to relevant case-related issues while equally con-
sidering the face-saving needs of their clients. Frequently trapped within contradictory
expectations, the categorisation work of the professionals is remarkably restrained and
characterised by spongy descriptions of the client. Considering the clients feelings and
face-saving needs, reports are designed not only in an issue-related but also a socially
acceptable way. Since Janets carer still has not shown up at the meeting, the head of the
service provider (HS) herself takes the responsibility to report Janets progress during the
rst three months of her placement:
CPC Janet 255-300
255 HS: that she is here since the twelfth of April is cle:ar,
256 we also know where she came from.
257 we know [this quite well.
258 SW?: [hm=hm-
259 (1.5)
260 HS: that she has found good: contact within the group,
261 that she was, however, at the beginning somewhat
262 so slandering a little bit,=
263 =like others do too-
264 parlance a little bit solálá.
265 so (-) not qui:te as one might expect: (1.0)
266 then uh: at the fteenth of April,
267 that is three days after she arrived,
268 She returned inebriated after going out with other
269 probably sort of an (-)INItiationPARTY, (1.5)
270 .hhh also the things mh: =
271 =why she attracted attention in the OTher institution,
272 that is uh to QUICKLY contact boys, ()
273 THE SAME also here for the rst time?
274 and then you have had uhm a relationship with a boy,
275 which ended quickly,
276 and you felt very sad about this,
277 and then () you drank FABRIC conditioner,
278 CH: ((laughs)) emphatically> hm hm:.>
279 HS: well.
280 CH: thats totally wrong.
281 HS: but,
282 what DID you drink instead?
283 CH: indignant> ABSOLUTELY no:thing.>
284 (1.0)
285 HS: no?
286 CH: I drank ABSOLUTELY nothing;
287 HS: we will ask MS BB (Janets carer) in a minute
288 =I do not KNOW this.
289 CH: MS (BB) was not present at ALL.
290 HS: maybe, but the carer must know this ANYWAY,
291 in a:ny case, nevertheless, you were uh: pretty much:
292 ()
293 HS: probably already forgotten this man.
294 CH: laughs> yes.>
295 HS: laughing> you cant remember anything->
296 .hh how sad you felt about it.
297 (1.0)
298 HS: .hh good=but uh=after all, she has CALMed down afterwards
299 (1.5)
300 then ha is described here also-
Not unlike the extract in the previous section, HSs statements seem primarily issue-
related avoiding the display of feelings at all. If, however, if we take a closer look on her
statements considering Janets feelings of self-esteem, we recognise various saliences that
will be the focus of the following paragraphs.
Omissions in the service of face-saving needs (lines 255259)
The report starts mentioning the date Janet entered the shelter. HS goes on to say that
everybody knows where Janet was sheltered before (line 256: we also know where she
came from.). The fact that HS precisely denote the date of Janets entry while leaving
Janets former housing unspoken (the clinical psychiatric department) is insofar index-
ical as it refers to the management of sensitive topics that may insult Janets self-esteem.
As far as all group members know that Janet had made several suicide attempts before her
recent placement, it is obvious to assume that the avoidance of delicate topics is also to
respect Janets face-saving needs circumventing negative feelings of being labelled with
a socially stigmatising attribute.
Downgrading to avoid negative feelings (lines 260273)
In the following section of her report, HS refers to various irregularities during Janets
stay in the shelter. By doing so, she follows a clearly recognisable pattern. On the one
hand, HS emphasises various observations characterising Janet as a dicult and
rebellious girl (line 261: DISaected; line 262: slandering; line 268: inebriated). On the
other hand, however, her descriptions and categorisations are conspicuously down-
graded and withdrawn (line 261: somewhat DISaected; line 262: slandering a little
bit = ;line269:probably sort of an (-)INItiationPARTY). Thus, HSreport has the
purpose of gathering evidence regarding any past and future measures to be taken to
safeguard Janet from further self-defeating conduct. However, as the categories used
could also be understood as an ascription of blame that in turn may provoke sub-
sequent justications,
HS is downgrading her categorical work which otherwise might
be heard as an accusation (somewhat; a little bit; probably sort of). By doing so, she
oscillates between issue-related and ethical expectations considering that negative
categorising may threaten the clients commitment as it provokes rejection and
Upgrading the display of feelings during conict management (lines 274294)
After reporting on Janetsconduct up to this point throughout referring to her as a third
person (she), HS abruptly changes to the second person singular (line 274: you) addres-
sing Janet personally during the following topic. According to her report, Janet drank
fabric softener after the ending of the relationship with her boyfriend. Besides changing
the form of addressing (from talking about to talking with), the description of Janets
feelings changes in a similar way, as they show up in a clearly exposed and enhanced
manner (line 276: and there you felt very sad). The upgrading (very) obviously serves as an
account to understand and explain Janets attempted suicide in terms of a reasonable
emotional pattern.
Moving from talking about to talking with, however, is also to redistribute the speak-
ers rights as the addressed client is entitled to respond as a sequential next. According to
her entitlement, Janet indeed reacts immediately and directly contrasts the issue por-
trayed with a dierent version of the event. Janet starts with laughter (line 278) indicating
her indignation, and continues with a proto-verbal rejection of HSdescription of the
event (hm hm) reinforcing it to a strong and explicit contradiction (line 280: thats
totally wrong; line 283: indignant> ABSOLUTELY no:thing.>; and nally in line 286:
I drank ABSOLUTELY nothing). It is remarkable here that Janet makes use of progressive
issue-related and prosodic accentuations (totally, ABSOLUTELY, indignant voice)
demonstrating that she is unwilling to deviate from her resistance against HSreported
version of the event.
Refusals, immediately and directly expressed by the client (especially of such a distinct
kind) are not very frequent in the CPCs under examination.
Hence, Janets display of
arousal and undeterred opposition lead to a conspicuous uncertainty concerning HS
perspective about the issue under consideration (line 279: well; line 281: but; line 285: no?;
line 288: = I do not KNOW this.). Even HSsuggestion to compromise and ask Janets
carer (line 287: we will ask MS BB) is dismissed immediately (line 289: MS (BB) was not
present at ALL.), whereupon HS again reacts highly defensive indicating that at least the
carer must know this ANYWAY (line 290).
Janets display of strong arousals in situations of latent or escalated conict thus seems
to strengthen her stance concerning the ascription of potentially threatening facts. While
she asserts her arousal by means of immediate, direct and uncompromising contra-
dictions, she connes HS to an increasingly defensive position. Eventually, HS proposes
a further compromise backtracking on Janets feelings at the end of her relationship with
her boyfriend (line 291: nevertheless, you were uh: pretty much: dUSt, werent you?). To
conclude, her surrender seems to have an overall liberating eect on Janet, who from now
on agrees with HSretracted version of the events demonstrating her compliance by
laughter and explicit agreement (line 294: laughing> yes.>). Contrary to earlier
instances, Janets laughter here apparently signals her easing her inner tensions, which
is conrmed by the fact that HS herself joins in Janets laughter thus marking the end of
the conict episode and the continuation of their alignment.
Safeguarding and return to the report (298299)
Although this last sequence of the extract is only brief and serves as a transitional
statement, it merits distinct consideration for several reasons. First, it is clear that HS
is willing to terminate this particular issue (line 298: .hh good = but uh = after all, she has
CALMed down . . .) and ready to continue with another topic of her report (line 299: then
ha is described here also-). Second, it can be noticed that HS goes back from the second
person singular (line 296: you) to the third person singular (line 298: she), re-establishing
the monologues form of her report again addressing Janet primarily as part of the case
and less as a person. Finally, HS refers to another feeling (line 298: after all, she has
CALMed down afterwards) using a term that represents the rhetoric of an institutional
activitythat is the report. Hence, all signals in this topic concluding sequence are
indicating HSreadiness to return to a quieter, interactively less sensitive track, which
nally also reduces the likelihood of injured feelings and further risks for Janets
As the above analyses clearly show, interactions between professionals and clients are
pivotal in shedding detailed light on institutional people processing. Seen from
a conversation analytic stance, social work practice proves to be an activity in a series
transforming the properties of a client into institutionally processable categories con-
stantly producing and reproducing them in the course of subsequent interactions.
Conversations between professionals and clients are therefore considered as the blueprint
of real-life laboratories of social work practice (cf. Juhila, Mäkitalo, & Noordegraf, 2014,
p. 9 .) unveiling the prerequisites and components of institutional action in the very
moment when it is talked into being. Our analyses, although restricted to a limited extract
of interactions, nonetheless reveal a typical universe of the explicit and tacit display of
feelings referring to dierent sequences and phases during the CPC. While the display of
positive feelings at least partially counteracts the asymmetries and inequalities of institu-
tional talk, it isfor similar reasonsreasonable to assume that negative feelings are
obstructive to establishing caseness.
Far from an exhaustive depiction of the display of feelings, the purpose of the present
analyses was to demonstrate how emotions respond to an institutional asymmetry that
provides the participants with unequal participation rights and inuencing opportunities
while establishing caseness. Reporting, for instance, as we have seen, acts to determine
the core issues and subsequent categories of the case as a result of the compressed
narrativesamong the professionals, ensuring the supremacy of an institutionalised and
goal-driven action. Intuitively aware of these interactional asymmetries, professionals
systematically make use of up- and downgraded evaluations to counterweigh the con-
stant threat to the clients self-esteem as this may aect their willingness to comply with
the categorisation work necessary to establish and justify caseness.
It is striking, however, to see how the display of aect and feelings relates to the
participants of the CPC meeting. Insinuating self-related feelings and inner states seems
to be mainly done by the clients, who according to our data react far more with aective
arousal to indicate their own stance relative to that of the professionalsevaluations,
recognising the consequences their actions may have. Professionals, on the other hand,
primarily make use of their feelings in a somewhat more instrumental and other-related
way. Vis-à-vis the client, they strive to avoid both the display and achievement of
unpleasant or negative feelings as this may challenge a positive working bond. For the
same reasons, positively connoted feelings become specic, explicit and intense, as this
will support the clientscompliance with institutional needs. Hence, it would be reason-
able to argue that the main trigger of emotion management refers to the asymmetrical
organisation of obligations and rights dening the gap between the actual and the ought.
What otherwise might be heard as an accusation or blame must be framed, mitigated and
minimised in one way or another to maintain the clients self-esteem and commitment.
Emotions, then, are an important vehicle in performing institutional tasks(Ruusuvuori,
2013, p. 338), exposing an empathetic and understanding stance within an unevenly
equipped and goal-driven profession. Correspondingly, even minor and incidental
activities contribute to form the ground of a social relationship, which, at the rst glance
(like, for instance, at the pre-beginning of the CPC Janet), appears rather irrelevant but
indeed proves to be benecial to further regulations. Organisations, one might conclude,
are emotional arenasin that members make use of cultural scripts and feeling rules
unveiling the ways how they intend to enact and perform their particular roles and
identities within an institutional framework.
Conversation analysis of social work practice allows us to generate most accurate
information about how participants understand, evaluate, and react from moment to
moment to the sequential ow of activities in which they take part. In doing so, the
explicit and tacit display of feelings turns out to be an important clue in safeguarding the
working relationship during the professional/client encounter in which the individual
rights and obligations are distributed due to the institutional needs. In processing
participantsdierent experiences and expectations, according to our analyses, it is key
not only to recognise what feelings reveal overtly and explicitly but also what they conceal
and leave unspoken. Paradoxically, the emotion management during a professional/
client encounter proceed without an explicit display of feelings as professionals strive
to prevent the emergence of negative feelings explicating case-relevant features while
similarly facing the clients needs to maintain self-esteem. Hence, although the above
disclosed emotion work remains unspoken, circumscribed or implicit, it altogether leaves
signicant traces that clearly work in favour to the clients compliance considering
further steps to be taken.
Hence, to investigate emotions as an inherent practice of ordinary and professional
action helps us to understand and reect some of the seen-but-unnoticed curiosities in
social work practice. Among the characteristics of modern professions, as Parsons (1951)
observed, aective neutrality is essential. This apparently applies to social work practice,
especially considering its benets for the rational, issue-based, and consensual processing
of cases. That does not mean that professionals themselves have no emotions or that they
are unwilling to exhibit all of them either. But unlike the client their display of feelings is
predominately issue- or other-related disclosing a broad range of implicit hints unveiling
their inner posture facing the other while simultaneously perpetuating their professional
1. In 2003, the DANASWAC scientic network (Discourse and Narrative Approaches to Social
Work and Counselling) was founded, which oers interested researchers an international
forum through publications, seminars and conferences. The declared goal is to give more
weight to alternative approaches to theory and methods in that eld including ethnography,
narrative and conversation analysis.
2. Empirically, the study makes use of audiotapes of 14 CPCs, recorded and observed in four
dierent institutions and covering four meetings from the beginning, ve from the middle
and another ve from the termination stages of the service provisions on residential care.
Participants to those conferences ranged from three to eight. Each of the audiotaped
conferences lasted between 40 and 130 minutes fully transcribed according to the prevailing
transcript notations documented in the appendix of this paper. To focus on only two, albeit
longer and contrasting extracts of the CPC Janet (including informal and formal conversa-
tions alike) is insofar convertible as it is mainly used to reect basic principles of emotion
management in social work practice.
3. The numbers at the beginning of the line indicate the reference in the transcript. CH stands
for the child Janet, MO for mother, SF for stepfather, SW for the representative from the
youth welfare oce, HS for the representative of the service provider, and IN for the
scientic observer. Further transcript notations will be explained at the Appendix of this
4. Boahis a widespread proto-verbal term in German language indicating a strong sensation
or impression of the speaker.
5. The signicance of such apparently minor issues to support a working relationship is often
underestimated. In the case of scheduled and planned meetings in social work oces, coee
(or tea) is at least in German social work practice irrespective of the time of day an
omnipresent feature to create and maintain an eective working relationship. In contrast
to the use of biscuits in working relations (cf. Lühr, 2008 under the promising heading
Management by Biscuits), the use of coee and tea widely seems to be unexplored.
6. Cf. for instance Buttnys(1993,p. 38) self-defence rule: This rule interactionally provides
for a slot after the blame for the accused to respond to critics (. . .): upon receiving a blame,
make a response (. . .) lest no response be heard by others as an admission to the blame.
7. However, no rule without exception, cf. the extensively analyses of the CPC Stephanin
Hitzler (2012), pp. 201.
Disclosure statement
No potential conict of interest was reported by the author.
The German Research Foundation (DFG) under Grant number 5437125 originally supported the
empirical data of this work.
Notes on contributor
Heinz Messmer, Dr. rer. soc. habil., is Professor at the University of Applied Sciences and Arts,
Northwestern Switzerland, School of Social Work, Institute for Studies in Children and Youth
Services. His research focusses on theory and practice in childcare practices as on research methods,
especially ethnomethodologically conversation analysis. [email:]
Baldock, J., & Prior, D. (1981). Social workers talking to clients: A study of verbal behaviour.
British Journal of Social Work,11(1), 1938.
Bergmann, J. (2014). Der Fall als epistemisches Objekt. In J. Bergmann, U. Dausendschön-Gay, &
F. Oberzaucher (Eds.), Der Fall. Studien zur epistemischen Praxis professionellen Handelns (pp.
423435). Bielefeld: Transcript.
Burkitt, I. (2002). Complex emotions: Relations, feelings and images in emotional experience. The
Sociological Review,50(2_suppl), 151167.
Buttny, R. (1993). Social accountability in communication. London: Sage.
Darwin, C. (1873). The expression of the emotions in man and animals. London: John Murray.
Denzin, N. K. (1980). A phenomenology of emotion and deviance. Zeitschrift für Soziologie,9(3),
Du Bois, J. W. (2007). The stance triangle. Stancetaking in Discourse: Subjectivity, Evaluation,
Interaction,164(3), 139182.
Edwards, D. (1999). Emotion discourse. Culture & Psychology,5(3), 271291.
Gergen, K. J. (1999). An invitation to social construction. London: Sage.
Goman, E. (1956). Embarrassment and social organization. American Journal of Sociology,62(3),
Goman, E. (1961). Encounters: Two studies in the sociology of interaction. Indianapolis, IN:
Goodwin, M., Cekaite, A., & Goodwin, C. (2012). Emotion as stance. In L. Sorjonen & A. Peräkylä
(Eds.), Emotion in interaction (pp. 1641). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hall, C., Juhila, K., Matarese, M., & Van Nijnatten, C. (2014). Analysing social work communica-
tion: Discourse in practice. London: Routledge.
Hall, C., Slembrouck, S., & Sarangi, S. (2006). Language practices in social work: Categorisation and
accountability in child welfare. London: Routledge.
Heritage, J. (1984). Garnkel and ethnomethodology. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Hitzler, S. (2012). Aushandlung ohne Dissens? Praktische Dilemmata der Gesprächsführung im
Hilfeplangespräch. Wiesbaden: VS-Verlag.
Hochschild, A. (1983). The managed heart. Berkeley: Univ. of California Press.
Juhila, K., Mäkitalo, A., & Noordegraf, M. (2014). Analysing social work interaction: Premises and
approaches. In C. Hall, K. Juhila, M. Matarese, & C. Van Nijnatten (Eds.), Analysing social work
communication: Discourse in practice (pp. 924). London: Routledge.
Lühr, H. (2008). Management by Biscuits oder der mit den Kalorien tanzt: Erfahrungen und
Erkenntnisse über Kekse in Dienstbesprechungen. Norderstedt: Books on Demand GmbH.
Massumi, B. (1995). The autonomy of aect. Cultural Critique,31,83109.
Messmer, H. (2017). Bringing morals to life Professionsuse of morals in German care planning
conferences. Journal of Applied Linguistics and Professional Practice,10(3), 265288.
Messmer, H., & Hitzler, S. (2008). Practice-based evidence. Social work viewed from an interaction
analysis perspective. In I. Bryderup (Ed.), Evidence based and knowledge based social work.
Research methods and approaches in social work research (pp. 3352). Aarhus: Aarhus
University Press.
Mik-Meyer, N. (2007). Interpersonal relations or jokes of social structure? Laughter in social work.
Qualitative Social Work,6(1), 626.
Nussbaum, M. C. (2001). Upheavals of thought. The intelligence of emotions. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Ott, B. L. (2017). Aect. Oxford research encyclopaedia of communication. New York, NY: Oxford
University Press. doi:10.1093/acrefore/9780190228613.013.56
Parsons, T. (1951). The social system. Glencoe, Ill.: The Free Press.
Pithouse, A., & Atkinson, P. (1988). Telling the case: Narrative in a social work oce. In
N. Coupland (Ed.), Styles of discourse (pp. 183200). London: Croom Helm.
Plutchik, R. (2001). The nature of emotions. Human emotions have deep evolutionary roots, a fact
that may explain their complexity and provide tools for clinical practice. American Scientist,89
(4), 344350.
Ruusuvuori, J. (2013). Emotion, aect and conversation. In J. Sidnell & T. Stivers (Eds.), The
handbook of conversation analysis (pp. 330349). Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.
Sacks, H. (1992). Lectures on conversation. Vol. I. G. Jeerson. (ed.). Oxford: Blackwell.
Sandlund, E. (2004). Feeling by doing. The social organization of everyday emotions in academic
talk-in-interaction. Karlstad: Karlstad University Studies.
Simmel, G. (1984). Das Individuum und die Freiheit. Berlin: Wagenbach.
Tomkins, S. S. (1982). Aect theory. In P. Ekman, W. V. Friesen, & P. Ellsworth (Eds.), Emotion in
the human face (2nd ed., pp. 353395). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Wetherell, M. (2012). Aect and emotion: A new social science understanding. London: Sage.
White, S. (1999). Examining the artfulness of risk talk. In A. Jokinen, K. Juhila, & T. Pösö (Eds.),
Constructing social work practices (pp. 87102). Aldershot [etc.]: Ashgate.
Zajonc, R. B. (1984). On the primacy of aect. American Psychologist,39(1), 117123.
Appendix: Transcript notation
(.) micro pause
(-) pause (one dash approximately .25 seconds)
(1.0) pause (in seconds)
() unintelligible utterance
(yes) uncertain utterance
((laughs)) context remarks
loudly> > remarks describing the utterance (including scope)
.h .hh inbreath
: stretching of phonemes
WELL capitals: emphasis
and [so
[okay overlap
. voice falls
; voice falls slightly
- voice unchanging
, voice rises slightly
? voice rises
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any citations for this publication.
Full-text available
Theory and practice of social work are highly morally grounded. As a basically helping profession, social work practice is closely linked to the idea that it will contribute to improving the lives of its clients. Social work practice is grounded in the various values of a societal order (social justice, individual rights, rights of religious freedom, human dignity, etc.), which are transformed into ethical standards that are used to structure normative expectations regarding the activities of professionals. Empirically, however, moral issues in social work practice often appear in a quite different way. Based on a conversation analysis of audio-taped discussions between professionals and clients in German care-planning conferences, this study emphasizes how morals are established primarily in a practical sense. By regarding morals as a sign of respect or disrespect, it is shown that professionals make use of morals to assess a client’s behaviour in either a positive or a negative way. Furthermore, it is argued that morals in social work practice primarily respond to the overall interactional asymmetries of a client–professional encounter. In addition, they also reflect the basically deficit-oriented case descriptions of the professionals to establish the case in a less threatening way.
Full-text available
Affect has historically been conceptualized in one of two dominant ways. The first perspective, which has its roots in psychology and neuroscience, tends to view affect as an elemental state. This tradition is reflected in Silvan S. Tomkins's theory of primary affects and Antonio Damasio's theory of basic emotions. Recent extensions of this tradition include the work of Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick, Lisa Cartwright, and Teresa Brennan. The second perspective, which is typically associated with developments in philosophy and the humanities, treats affect as an intensive force. This tradition, whose most famous proponent is Gilles Deleuze, is evident in Brian Massumi's theory of autonomous affect and Nigel Thrift's non-representational theory. Recent extensions of this tradition tend to emphasize the importance of materiality, or what Jane Bennett has called " thing-power. " A number of scholars working in communication and cultural studies have created a third, hybrid tradition that attempts to bridge or mediate the two dominant historical accounts. This third perspective includes Lawrence Grossberg's notion of affective investments, Christian Lundberg's Lacanian-inspired view of affect, Sara Ahmed's work on the sociality of emotion, and Gernot Böhme's theory of atmospheres.
Analysis of language and discourse in social sciences has become increasingly popular over the past thirty years. Only very recently has it been applied to the study of social work, despite the fact that communication and language are central to social work practice. This book looks at how social workers, their clients and other professionals categorise and manage the problems of social work in ways which are rendered understandable, accountable and which justify professional intervention. Features include: •studies of key practice areas in social work, such as interviews, case conferences, home visits •analysis of the language and construction used in typical case studies of everyday social work practice •exploration of the ways in which professionals can examine their own practice and uncover the discursive, narrative and rhetorical methods that they use. The purpose of this engaging study is to increase awareness of language and discourse in order to help develop better practice in social work. It is essential reading for professionals in social work, child welfare and the human services and will be a valuable contribution to the study of professional language and communication.
Twenty-four interviews between trained social workers and their clients were recorded and compared with the findings of a study of how doctors talk to their patients. The social workers' techniques were found to be much more elaborate and much less obvious than those used by the doctors.
In recent years there has been a surge of interest in affect and emotion. Scholars want to discover how people are moved, and understand embodied social action, feelings and passions. How do social formations ‘grab’ people? How do roller coasters of contempt, patriotism, hate and euphoria power public life? This book systematically reviews research on affect and emotion in neuroscience, social psychology, sociology, and political science. It develops a critique of the ‘turn to affect’ and argues for an approach based on affective practice. It provides new analyses to explain how affect travels, settles, circulates and coalesces.
With communication and relationships at the core of social work, this book reveals the way it is foremost a practice that becomes reality in dialogue, illuminating some of the profession's key dilemmas. Applied discourse studies illustrate the importance of talk and interaction in the construction of everyday and institutional life. This book provides a detailed review and illustration of the contribution of discourse approaches and studies on professional interaction to social work. Concentrating on how social workers carry out their work in everyday organisational encounters with service users and colleagues, each chapter uses case studies analysing real-life social work interactions to explore a concept that has relevance both in discursive studies and in social work. The book thus demonstrates what detailed discursive studies on interaction can add to professional social work theories and discussions. Chapters on categorization, accountability, boundary work, narrative, advice-giving, resistance, delicacy and reported speech, review the literature and discuss how the concept has been developed and how it can be applied to social work. The book encourages professional reflection and the development of rigorous research methods, making it particularly appropriate for postgraduate and post-qualifying study in social work where participants are encouraged to examine their own professional practice. It is also essential reading for social work academics and researchers interested in language, communication and relationship-based work and in the study of professional practices more generally. © 2014 selection and editorial material, Christopher Hall, Kirsi juhila, Maureen Matarese and Carolus van Nijnatten. All rights reserved.