Abstract
ABSTRACT This paper concerns the interactional dilemma between displaying affiliation and doing being neutral. This dilemma is highly salient in police interviews with child witnesses where interviewing guidelines encourage police officers to take a neutral stance to avoid steering children’s stories. In this article, we use conversation analysis to analyze childrens’ volunteered accounts of their own role during the alleged offense, e.g., how they resisted. Such accounts make relevant affiliative uptakes such as approval, disagreement, or reassurance that may be seen as nonneutral. Hence, these accounts raise interactional dilemmas for police officers: Should they do what is interactionally relevant or follow the guidelines? Our analysis shows how police officers display and deal with this dilemma and that children may add to it by pursuing something more than neutralistic uptakes. The upshot of this analysis is that attempting to be neutral in interaction may cause apparently undesirable interactional difficulties. The data are from the Netherlands.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
