A distinction has been drawn between basic (pure) conversation analysis (CA) and applied CA. Applied CA has become especially beneficial for informing areas of practice such as health, social care and education, and is an accepted form of research evidence in the scientific rhetoric. There are different ways of undertaking applied CA, with different foci and goals. In this article, we articulate one way of conducting applied CA, that is especially pertinent for practitioners working in different fields. We conceptualise this as Reflective Interventionist CA (RICA). We argue that this approach to applied CA is important because of its emphasis on the reflective stance that is valuable to an understanding of research data, its commitment to collaboration with practitioners, and its inductive style. In this paper, we outline the core premises and benefits of this approach and offer empirical examples to support our argument. To conclude, we consider the implications for evidence-based practice.

中文翻译：

---

反思性干预对话分析

在基本（纯）对话分析 (CA) 和应用 CA 之间进行了区分。应用 CA 尤其有利于为健康、社会关怀和教育等实践领域提供信息，并且是科学修辞中公认的研究证据形式。应用 CA 有不同的方式，具有不同的重点和目标。在本文中，我们阐述了一种进行应用 CA 的方法，这对于在不同领域工作的从业者尤其相关。我们将其概念化为 Reflective Interventionist CA (RICA)。我们认为这种应用 CA 的方法很重要，因为它强调对理解研究数据很有价值的反思立场，它致力于与从业者合作，以及它的归纳风格。在本文中，我们概述了这种方法的核心前提和好处，并提供了实证例子来支持我们的论点。总之，我们考虑了对循证实践的影响。