Affiliation in Conversation

Lindström, Anna; Sorjonen, Marja-Leena

doi:10.1002/9781118325001.ch17

Cited by 74 publications

(65 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The emotion described in the story is probably better conceived of as an economical way for the teller to display her contemporaneous stance towards the events (for emotion as stance, see M. H. Goodwin et al, 2012). In receiving the account, the interviewer is co--operating by aligning (Lindström and Sorjonen, 2013) with the activity of story--telling, but not affiliating (Lindström and Sorjonen, 2013) with the stance expressed in it.…”

Section: Reports Of Distressmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Neither of these classes of report prompted a response from the interviewer. Our analysis, following the distinction made by Lindström and Sorjonen (2013) is that the officer was aligning with the complainant's action in story telling, while withholding affiliation to the stance that the story was expressing. This is consistent with other institutional interviews where clients may report troubles: indeed Ruusuvuori reports that "the most usual reception of the patients' troubles tellings was a minimal acknowledgment, silence, and/or a continuation of the task--related activity at hand, such as interviewing the patient (40% of the responses in homeopathy, 55% in general practice consultations)" (Ruusuvuori, 2005, p 208).…”

Section: Distress Met With Minimal or No Acknowledgementmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Dealing with the distress of people with intellectual disabilities reporting sexual assault and rape

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

When police officers interview people with intellectual disabilities who allege sexual assault and rape, they must establish rapport with the interviewee but deal with their distress in a way that does not compromise the interview’s impartiality and its acceptability in court. Inspection of 19 videotaped interviews from an English police force’s records reveals that the officers deal with expressed distress by choosing among three practices: minimal (e.g. okay) or no acknowledgement, acknowledging the expressed emotion as a matter of the complainant’s difficulty in proceeding (e.g. take your time) and rarely (and only if the complainants were apparently unable to resume their talk) explicit reference to their emotion (e.g. it’s obviously upsetting for you). We discuss these practices as ways of managing the conflicting demands of rapport and evidence-gathering.

show abstract

Section: Reports Of Distressmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Distress Met With Minimal or No Acknowledgementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Dealing with the distress of people with intellectual disabilities reporting sexual assault and rape

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In one call, after pre-closing turns have been exchanged, the caller reopens the conversation to express concern about what will happen next and whether her trouble can be addressed in a timely fashion. The agent affiliates (Lindström & Sorjonen 2013) with her concern through the use of collaborative turn construction (Lerner 2004) and does his best to reassure her. Just prior to the end of the call, he emphatically reciprocates her thanks, which may, in this context, be heard as further reassurance that her problem will now be dealt with.…”

Section: Calls Featuring Caller-initiated Reciprocal Thanking Over Twmentioning

confidence: 99%

Patterns of thanking in the closing section of UK service calls

Hansen

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

I investigate patterns of usage of thanking formulae in the closing section of a corpus of 94 telephone calls made by tenants to a UK housing association. The data suggest that unilateral thanking is the norm when calls are institutionally and interactionally unmarked. In contrast, mutual thanking correlates mainly with the presence of interactional problems of various kinds, or, in a few cases, with features that are not problematic as such, but simply interactionally marked given the nature of the activity. When initiated by agents rather than by callers, thanking is frequently hearable as conveying an apologetic stance. Participants thus seem to orient to different thanking patterns as devices which may be used either to mark the preceding interaction as an instance of ‘business-as-usual’ or, if such is not the case, to restore interpersonal harmony or index awareness that aspects of the preceding interaction have otherwise deviated from situational expectations.

show abstract

“…Research on language and social interaction has documented a preference for actions that promote social solidarity (Lindström and Sorjonen, 2013). Consistently through ordinary and institutional settings, people design their social actions in ways that promote affiliation, agreement and so on (Pomerantz and Heritage, 2013).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Delivering criticism through anecdotes in interaction

Pino

2016

Discourse Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Published as Pino, M. (2016). Delivering criticism through anecdotes in interaction. Discourse Studies 18(6), pp. 695-715. AbstractCriticising someone's conduct is a disaffiliative action that can attract recipient objections, particularly in the form of defensive detailing by which the recipient volunteers extenuating circumstances that undermine the criticism. In Therapeutic Community (TC) meetings for clients with drug addiction, support staff regularly criticise clients' behaviours that violate therapeutic principles or norms of conduct. This study examines cases where, rather than criticising a client's behaviour directly, TC staff members do so indirectly through an anecdote: a case illustrating the inappropriateness of the type of conduct of which the client's behaviour is an instantiation. TC staff members design the anecdote to convey a principle or norm of conduct which the client has putatively violated, and they systematically pursue endorsement of that principle by the client. By constructing the anecdote as an exemplary case, distanced from the individual client's personal experience, TC staff members make it an empirically unverifiable, self-evident, and therefore hard to challenge, illustration of a norm.

show abstract

Affiliation in Conversation

Cited by 74 publications

References 0 publications

Dealing with the distress of people with intellectual disabilities reporting sexual assault and rape

Dealing with the distress of people with intellectual disabilities reporting sexual assault and rape

Patterns of thanking in the closing section of UK service calls

Delivering criticism through anecdotes in interaction

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About