Bolden2015
| Bolden2015 | |
|---|---|
| BibType | ARTICLE |
| Key | Bolden2015 |
| Author(s) | Galina B. Bolden |
| Title | Transcribing as research: 'manual' transcription and conversation analysis |
| Editor(s) | |
| Tag(s) | Transcription, EMCA, technology, methodology |
| Publisher | |
| Year | 2015 |
| Language | English |
| City | |
| Month | |
| Journal | Research on Language and Social Interaction |
| Volume | 48 |
| Number | 3 |
| Pages | 276–280 |
| URL | Link |
| DOI | 10.1080/08351813.2015.1058603 |
| ISBN | |
| Organization | |
| Institution | |
| School | |
| Type | |
| Edition | |
| Series | |
| Howpublished | |
| Book title | |
| Chapter | |
Abstract
Moore (2015/this issue) discusses possibilities afforded by state-of-the-art automated transcription technologies for conversation analytic (CA) research. Since these technologies may become attractive to conversation analysts, their impact should be carefully considered. In this commentary, I offer some words of caution about adopting automated transcription techniques. Three issues are raised: first, the role of transcribing in research and training; second, potential influences of automated transcription on research agendas; and, third, some analytic problems involved in relying on a large bank of transcribed yet unfamiliar data. Data are in American English.
Notes
