Collins1999
| Collins1999 | |
|---|---|
| BibType | ARTICLE |
| Key | Collins1999 |
| Author(s) | Sarah Collins, Ivana Marková |
| Title | Interactions between impaired and unimpaired speakers: Intersubjectivity and the interplay of culturally shared and situation specific knowledge |
| Editor(s) | |
| Tag(s) | EMCA, Conversation Analysis, Atypical populations, Communication impairment, Intersubjectivity |
| Publisher | |
| Year | 1999 |
| Language | |
| City | |
| Month | |
| Journal | British Journal of Social Psychology |
| Volume | 38 |
| Number | 4 |
| Pages | 339–368 |
| URL | Link |
| DOI | 10.1348/014466699164211 |
| ISBN | |
| Organization | |
| Institution | |
| School | |
| Type | |
| Edition | |
| Series | |
| Howpublished | |
| Book title | |
| Chapter | |
Abstract
The part played by culturally shared knowledge in interaction is generally recognised. However, the details of how it may be manifested in interaction are largely undocumented. This study explores this issue in the context of interactions between impaired and unimpaired speakers, using a conversation analytic approach in combination with a communication task commonly employed in experimental social psychology. Three exemplary cases are analysed. Results show that when the task interaction is co-constructed, the interaction is collaboratively enacted, participants actions are in alignment, and the task outcome is relatively accurate. When the unimpaired speaker proceeds on the basis of culturally shared knowledge, and thereby ‘unilaterally’ manages the interaction, two courses of action are available to the impaired speaker. The impaired speaker may make attempts to provide situation specific details. In this case, because each participant is drawing on different resources to construct the interaction, their actions are out of alignment, and the task outcome is less accurate. Alternatively, the impaired speaker may concur with the culturally shared knowledge drawn on by the unimpaired speaker, in which case the participants actions are in alignment, but the task outcome is highly inaccurate. The authors conclude that by combining a conversation analytic approach with a communication task which reflects participants everyday experiences, orientations to different interaction resources can be drawn out. This can have relevance for, and help to elicit, practices in everyday interaction.
Notes
