Olbertz-Siitonen2015
| Olbertz-Siitonen2015 | |
|---|---|
| BibType | ARTICLE |
| Key | Olbertz-Siitonen2015 |
| Author(s) | Margarethe Olbertz-Siitonen |
| Title | Transmission delay in technology-mediated interaction at work |
| Editor(s) | |
| Tag(s) | EMCA, technology-mediated interaction, video-conference, meeting, technical trouble, transmission delay, conversation analysis, sequentiality |
| Publisher | |
| Year | 2015 |
| Language | |
| City | |
| Month | |
| Journal | PsychNology Journal |
| Volume | 13 |
| Number | 2-3 |
| Pages | 203-234 |
| URL | Link |
| DOI | |
| ISBN | |
| Organization | |
| Institution | |
| School | |
| Type | |
| Edition | |
| Series | |
| Howpublished | |
| Book title | |
| Chapter | |
Abstract
This paper investigates transmission delay in technology-mediated interaction from a participant’s perspective. The approach chosen here contrasts with previous studies of delay: only what is seen, heard and done at one end (i.e., what is available on screen) is considered in the analysis. It is argued that participants themselves lack access to the other sides of their interactions as they unfold at remote locations, and they thus cannot observe and deal with delay from an outside perspective. Analyzing single cases of delay-ininteraction within the framework of conversation analysis, the focus is on dispersed conversation partners’ resources to detect a problem, and to make visible and relevant the experience of time lag. The data used consist of video-based mediated meetings between knowledge workers of a small Finnish company. Phenomena that may evoke reference to transmission delay in interaction include prolonged overlap, gap and sequential disarray and missed attempt at turn-taking. Delay in such cases is referred to as an explanation for mismatching, incongruous contributions. This, as well as participants’ observable attempts to restore order, reveals fundamental expectations and orientations with respect to sequentiality as well as to technology-mediation.
Notes
