Difference between revisions of "Glenn2010a"

From emcawiki
Jump to: navigation, search
(Created page with "{{BibEntry |BibType=ARTICLE |Author(s)=Phillip Glenn; |Title=Interviewer Laughs: Shared Laughter and Asymmetries in Employment Interviews |Tag(s)=EMCA; laughter; asymmetries;...")
 
m
 
(One intermediate revision by one other user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
 
{{BibEntry
 
{{BibEntry
 
|BibType=ARTICLE
 
|BibType=ARTICLE
|Author(s)=Phillip Glenn;  
+
|Author(s)=Phillip Glenn;
|Title=Interviewer Laughs: Shared Laughter and Asymmetries in Employment Interviews
+
|Title=Interviewer laughs: shared laughter and asymmetries in employment interviews
|Tag(s)=EMCA; laughter; asymmetries; employment interviews
+
|Tag(s)=EMCA; laughter; asymmetries; employment interviews; delicates
 
|Key=Glenn2010a
 
|Key=Glenn2010a
 
|Year=2010
 
|Year=2010

Latest revision as of 12:23, 25 November 2019

Glenn2010a
BibType ARTICLE
Key Glenn2010a
Author(s) Phillip Glenn
Title Interviewer laughs: shared laughter and asymmetries in employment interviews
Editor(s)
Tag(s) EMCA, laughter, asymmetries, employment interviews, delicates
Publisher
Year 2010
Language
City
Month
Journal Journal of Pragmatics
Volume 42
Number 6
Pages 1485–1498
URL Link
DOI 10.1016/j.pragma.2010.01.009
ISBN
Organization
Institution
School
Type
Edition
Series
Howpublished
Book title
Chapter

Download BibTex

Abstract

Routinely, in a corpus of videotaped employment interviews, the interviewer invites laughter. The interviewee laughs along. The interviewer may produce a next laughable or briefly topicalize the laughable materials, but the interviewee does not do so. Rather, the interviewee will wait for the interviewer to take the lead in returning them to the business of the interview. The asymmetries evident in the sequential organization of these shared laughs show participant orientation to respective institutional roles. These asymmetries are consistent with those identified in previous research examining doctor–patient and survey interviewer–respondent interactions. While laughing together might appear to reduce power distance and bring participants together, the organization and distribution of these shared laughter instances reflect and reinscribe the hegemony of the roles of interviewer and interviewee.

Notes