Distortion and the Politics of Pain Relief

Amy Koerber Texas Tech University ; E. Jonathan Arnett Texas Tech University ; Tamra Cumbie Texas Tech University

Abstract

This article invokes Habermas's ideal speech situation to analyze the controversy surrounding a recent study of pain relief for women in labor. Using Habermas's concepts, the authors argue that distortion of scientific and medical information originated in the New England Journal of Medicine article that first reported the study's results. Thus, their analysis aims to complicate the assumption that such distortion starts only with public reporting and to expose the ways that scientific or medical research from the beginning can be reported to either facilitate or preclude public debate and understanding of complex issues.

Journal
Journal of Business and Technical Communication
Published
2008-07-01
DOI
10.1177/1050651908315985
Open Access
Closed

Citation Context

Cited by in this index (2)

  1. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication
  2. Technical Communication Quarterly

Cites in this index (11)

  1. Written Communication
  2. Technical Communication Quarterly
  3. Technical Communication Quarterly
  4. Written Communication
  5. Journal of Business and Technical Communication
Show all 11 →
  1. Written Communication
  2. Journal of Business and Technical Communication
  3. Journal of Business and Technical Communication
  4. Technical Communication Quarterly
  5. Technical Communication Quarterly
  6. Written Communication
Also cites 17 works outside this index ↓
  1. Calsamiglia, H. (Ed.). (2003). Popularization discourse [Special issue]. Discourse Studies, 5(2).
  2. 10.1056/NEJMe048350
  3. 10.7208/chicago/9780226099088.001.0001
  4. 10.1093/clinids/9.5.987
  5. 10.1177/016224398901400103
  6. Rhetorical figures in science
  7. 10.1097/00006250-200207000-00032
  8. 10.1111/j.0730-7659.2006.00076.x
  9. 10.1177/030631295025003001
  10. 10.1177/1461445603005002006
  11. 10.1016/j.ajog.2005.10.821
  12. 10.1017/CCOL052144120X.006
  13. 10.1017/CCOL052144120X.008
  14. 10.1017/CCOL052144120X.001
  15. 10.1007/978-94-009-5239-3_1
  16. 10.1080/108107397127888
  17. 10.1056/NEJMoa042573
CrossRef global citation count: 5 View in citation network →