The professional construction of ‘paranoia’ and the discursive use of diagnostic criteria

This study examined the ways in which five mental health professionals talked about paranoia using a number of rhetorical strategies in order to meet challenges, for example that paranoid beliefs might be true.

Abstract

This study examined the ways in which five mental health professionals talked about paranoia. A discourse analysis (Potter & Wetherell, 1987) suggested that interviewees positioned themselves, and were themselves positioned, by a number of discourses, or systematic ways of talking, in relation to this topic. These discourses appeared to serve a number of functions including the maintenance of professional legitimacy. Interviewees used a number of rhetorical strategies (including exploiting the range and ambiguity of diagnostic definitions, criteria and theories) in order to meet challenges, for example that paranoid beliefs might be true.