Explicit generalisations are statements that attribute a characteristic to all
members of a social category (e.g., drug users). This paper examines the tensions
and negotiations that the use of generalisations prompts within support group
interactions. Generalisations are practices for the cautious implementation of
delicate actions. They can be used to convey perspectives on group members’
experiences by implication (without commenting on them directly), by virtue of
those members belonging to the category to which a generalisation applies. At
the same time, generalisations can misrepresent some individual cases within that
category. Using conversation analysis, the paper investigates how generalisations
are deployed, challenged, and then defended in support group interactions. These
analyses identify a tension between utilising the sense-making resources that
category memberships afford, and the protection of its members from unwelcome
generalisations. Data consist of recorded support-group meetings for people
recovering from drug addiction (in Italy) and for bereaved people (in the UK).
Funding
Work on the TC data was funded by the People Programme (Marie Curie Actions) of the European’s Union Seventh Framework Programme (FP7=2007-2013) under REA grant agreement no 626893.