DeRijk2025
| DeRijk2025 | |
|---|---|
| BibType | ARTICLE |
| Key | DeRijk2025 |
| Author(s) | Lynn de Rijk, Leonie Cornips |
| Title | Studying the detailed work of play using conversation analysis: Three case studies of pig interaction in industrial‑rearing settings |
| Editor(s) | |
| Tag(s) | EMCA, Pig interaction, Conversation analysis, Play fighting, Piglet play, Production animals |
| Publisher | |
| Year | 2025 |
| Language | English |
| City | |
| Month | |
| Journal | Interaction Studies |
| Volume | 25 |
| Number | 2 |
| Pages | 190-217 |
| URL | Link |
| DOI | 10.1075/is.22059.der |
| ISBN | |
| Organization | |
| Institution | |
| School | |
| Type | |
| Edition | |
| Series | |
| Howpublished | |
| Book title | |
| Chapter | |
Abstract
This paper seeks to explore what happens when research methods predominantly reserved for the human animal are applied to study behavior of other animals. Specifically, we apply conversation analysis to investigate play fighting behavior of piglets in industrial-rearing conditions through three case studies. The analysis shows how play fighting is a mutually and continually (re-)established activity that relies on monitoring the other party’s continued willingness to engage. We show this orientation to continued willingness distinguishes the activity from more serious fighting. Maintaining mutual willingness is sequentially achieved through mutually constructed opening and closing sequences, floor yielding, and locally negotiating the rules for play. The head toss, a known play marker for pigs, was used flexibly by these piglets. These findings add to or reframe findings from behavioral studies of pig play. In conclusion, applying conversation analysis to pig interaction proves not only possible but fruitful as an additional approach to methods in the field of animal communication.
Notes
