At the Intersection of Epistemics and Action: Responding with <i>I Know</i>

Mikesell, Lisa; Bolden, Galina B.; Mandelbaum, Jenny; Robinson, Jeffrey D.; Romaniuk, Tanya; Bolaños-Carpio, Alexa; Searles, Darcey K.; Wei, Wan; DiDomenico, Stephen M.; Angell, Beth

doi:10.1080/08351813.2017.1340711

Cited by 30 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 40 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Instances were analysed using CA (see Sidnell, , for an overview). CA has been used to great effect to consider in interactional terms what is traditionally conceived as a psychological or cognitive matter (Mikesell et al ., ; Potter & Edwards, ), including the production of identities in talk (Antaki, Barnes, & Leudar, ; Antaki & Widdicombe, ; Widdicombe, ). CA does not deny the existence of thoughts and feelings.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reconsidering self‐deprecation as a communication practice

Speer

2019

British J Social Psychol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

‘Self‐deprecation’ (SD) is widely understood within social psychology and popular culture as a form of self‐talk that reflects a cognitive state, such as low self‐esteem or negative self‐regard. However, most research on SD suffers theoretical and methodological problems that fail to account for how its cognitive and linguistic aspects can be reconciled. We know little about SD as it occurs in interactional settings. Utilizing a conversation analytic (CA) perspective that brackets cognitive explanations for linguistic phenomena, this paper draws on more than 100 hours of transcribed recordings of interactions from diverse settings to systematically examine the form and function of a common class of SD: critical comments by a speaker on their current talk or actions (self‐deprecatory meta‐comments; SDMCs). Analyses demonstrate that SDMCs are used in environments of possible or actual interactional trouble, and manage this trouble in different sequential positions. The paper shows that SDs can be treated as a communication practice. Rigorous analysis of SDMCs can enrich understanding of the construction of ‘identities’ in talk. It advances a CA understanding of the ascription of social actions, and the preference for self‐criticism over criticism by others. Findings suggest that widespread advice to self‐deprecate less may be invalid.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reconsidering self‐deprecation as a communication practice

Speer

2019

British J Social Psychol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…in (5) responded to with Have I ever! Or Just a little bit) (e.g., Mikesell, et al, 2017;Stivers and Hayashi, 2010). And yet, while all of these may be 'agreements' at one level of analysis, none of these 'alternatives' was produced.…”

Section: A) On "Writing Metrics"mentioning

confidence: 99%

Actions in practice: On details in collections

Clift

Raymond

2018

Discourse Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Several of the contributions to the Lynch, et al. (2016) special issue make the claim that conversation-analytic research into epistemics is "routinely crafted at the expense of actual, produced and constitutive detail, and what that detail may show us" (Macbeth and Wong, 2016: 585-6). Here we seek to address the inappositeness of this critique by tracing precisely how it is that recognisable actions emerge from distinct practices of interaction. We begin by reviewing some of the foundational tenets of conversation-analytic theory and methodincluding the relationship between position and composition, and the making of collectionsas these appear to be primary sources of confusion for many of the contributors to the Lynch, et al. special issue. We then target some of the specific arguments presented in the special issue, including the alleged 'over-hearer's' writing of metrics, the provision of so-called 'alternative' analyses, and the supposed 'crafting' of generalizations in epistemics research. In addition, in light of Lynch's (2016: 18) more general assertion that CA has recently been experiencing a "rapprochement" with what he disparagingly refers to as the "juggernaut" of linguistics, we discuss the specific expertise that linguists have to offer in analyzing particular sorts of interactional detail. The paper as a whole thus illustrates that, rather than being produced "at the expense of actual, produced and constitutive detail," conversation-analytic findings-including its work in epistemics-are unambiguously anchored in such detail. We conclude by offering our comments as to the link between CA and linguistics more generally, arguing that this relationship has long proven to be-and indeed continues to be-a mutually beneficial one.

show abstract

“…playing me at this point” (L39), where “playing me” idiomatically refers to exploiting a person, or to use them in the sense of playing an instrument. Adam makes the alternate version of Kat's “thank you” intelligible—manipulation rather than genuine praise—and also indicates that this is a newly acquired understanding, happening “at this point.” Relatedly, though not identically, Mikesell et al () find that “I know” as a complete response can act as a correction, resisting the categorization of the recipient (in this case, Adam) as an unknowing party. Adam is both ascribing manipulation and doing the ascription as an updating action of his awareness of the manipulation.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Manipulation in Board Game Interactions: Being a Sporting Player

Hofstetter

Robles

2018

Symbolic Interaction

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Deception and manipulation are expected in strategic gameplay, but how do players negotiate what counts as acceptable kinds of manipulation? We compare three examples from a corpus of 30 hours of competitive board game play, using conversation analysis to examine how players orient to the reasonableness of manipulations. We show that contingencies of timing of the attribution and receipt of the manipulation are as morally concerned as manipulation itself. Players organize their negotiations of acceptability around the concept of a “sporting” player or move. The “sporting” resource shows one situated members' method for collaboratively managing fairness and morality in play. A video abstract is available at https://youtu.be/IlaE-w6FUxw.

show abstract

At the Intersection of Epistemics and Action: Responding with I Know

Cited by 30 publications

References 40 publications

Reconsidering self‐deprecation as a communication practice

Reconsidering self‐deprecation as a communication practice

Actions in practice: On details in collections

Manipulation in Board Game Interactions: Being a Sporting Player

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About