№ 2, 2007
The article covers an attempt to reveal the borderline areas of an expert interview where the basics of expertability, i.e. the knowledge of the subject are falsified. On the basis of the conversation analysis of the expert poll conducted by the Public Opinion Foundation on regional elections in February 2005 the authors identify seven falsifications of expertability: (1) busyness and/or lack of time, (2) lack of the knowledge of the rules of the game, (3) the obscurity of the interviewer’s status, (4) the one-sided standardization of a dialogue, (5) the inadequate correction of a no-response, (6) the nonmotivated filling of pauses, (7) the irrelevancy of specifications, resulting in false responses, behind the expert cover of which there is doubt, uncertainty and very often just a denial of further reasoning on the proposed topic. In the article it is very well shown that expertability proliferation results in profane knowledge masked as personal opinions and assessments. The authors conclude that under the lack of mechanisms confirming the expertability of a response it is impossible to assess the quality of the data being gathered. Hence, the consumers of the information created by kind of an expert discourse may be easily caught into the trap of profane assessments not even taking a notice of the catch.
Main Page ~ Authors ~ Yashina Anastasia