It is an art to better explain a patient or family member’s condition. As a doctor, it is especially important to know how to express your thoughts clearly and concisely and logically, which belongs to the category of efficient communication. The connotation is mainly to improve the effectiveness of communication, that is, communication is to solve the problem, so there should be clear and valuable ideas.
The second is to improve the efficiency of communication, that is, communication to allow the other party to accurately and quickly understand your meaning and grasp the key points.
At present, there are mainly two kinds of communication conversation structure, namely, logical argumentative structure and logical combination structure.
(A), logical argumentative structure (deductive inference)
Logical argumentative structure, that is, deductive inference.
Firstly, the main reason is stated, generally starting with “an uncontroversial statement of the situation”.
This is followed by a “commentary on the situation”.
then “the meaning of the situation and the commentary (therefore, …)”.
Finally, the central idea.
The advantages of this structure are: it proves the inevitable direction of the content (there is no second way); it is especially effective for listeners with a rejectionist mentality.
The disadvantages are: if the audience disagrees with the “situation” or “opinion”, the argument loses its persuasive power, and the audience has to remember a lot of information when they hear the final “so” conclusion.
(B), the logical combination of structure (inductive conclusion)
The logical combination of structure, that is, inductive conclusion. The central idea is stated first, and then the main reasons supporting the idea are stated.
The advantages of this structure: easy to remember the main points, the audience focused on specific measures is very effective; one point is denied, the rest of the points are still persuasive.
The disadvantages are: it may be forced on some listeners.
This logical combination of structure, is the pyramid principle, “first from the conclusion, that is, the central idea first, and then extrapolated forward”.
(C), for example
1, the product price increase report
You are in the office, suddenly your subordinates rushed in and said to you: “boss, I recently paid attention to the price of raw materials, found that many steel prices have increased, and just now the logistics company also called to say price increases, I compared several prices, but still no way to convince him not to increase prices; also, a competitive brand recently also increased prices, I saw ……; by the way, advertising costs have also been spending faster recently, if …… possible ……”.
This is the logical argumentative structure, are you confused? After listening for half a day you still don’t know exactly what he wants to explain? Or what help you are asked to provide? Or what problem to solve? Or what decision to make?
If he said this: “boss, I think our brand should increase prices by 20%, and to exceed the competitive brands, because first, raw materials have recently increased prices by 30%, logistics costs have also risen; second, all competitive brands have raised prices by 10-20%, we should follow up; third, advertising costs exceed the standard, we should also pull out the space, you can do advertising ……, boss, do you think this proposal is feasible?” .
Is this more clear? This is the “pyramid principle”, that is, the logical combination of structure.
2, the way to write a letter of disagreement
(1) according to the “logical argumentative structure” of the writing method should be.
Mr. so-and-so.
We are old friends for many years and have spent many good times together …. But a month ago you said some unpleasant things…. Last fortnight you didn’t come to my party…. And then…. Therefore, “I hate you”. So, based on the above reasons, let’s break off our relationship.
This way of writing still seems to be a bit ambiguous and draggy.
(2) According to the “logical combination structure”, it should be written as follows
Mr. So-and-so.
I hate you! Because … the first reason. . the second reason…. The third reason.
The logical combination of the structure of writing a “I hate you”, the subject is clear, concise and powerful.
3, and the patient’s family to explain the condition
(1) The structure of the conversation according to the “logical argumentative structure” should be.
Your father has a liver problem….
Kidney problems …….
There are problems with the lungs….
Therefore, the condition is serious….
Therefore, it’s dying….
In this kind of talk, if the patient’s family expresses doubts about one of the reasons, “The liver function was checked yesterday, and the index is fine,” they will have doubts about the conclusion, “It’s dying so soon, it shouldn’t be, is it a misdiagnosis… “.
(2) The structure of the conversation according to the “logical combination structure” should be.
Your father is dying. He has a liver problem….
There are problems with the kidneys …….
There are problems with the lungs….
Therefore, the condition is serious.
In this type of conversation, even if the patient’s family doubts one of the reasons, “The liver function was checked yesterday and the indicators were fine,” there is no doubt about the conclusion, because even if the liver function test is wrong, the kidney problem is enough to kill the patient.
The first sentence of the logical combination of the structure of the conversation “dying”, the message is enough to make the patient’s family grief. This is the “Pyramid Principle”.
Therefore, in the doctor-patient communication, simplicity is the first element, using simple language, to convey a clear and unambiguous message, in order to achieve the desired effect.