The co-creation of meaningful action: bridging enaction and interactional sociology

Jaegher, Hanne De; Peräkylä, Anssi; Stevanovic, Melisa

doi:10.1098/rstb.2015.0378

Cited by 63 publications

(61 citation statements)

References 70 publications

(114 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A similar situational normative dimension can also be perceived in adult interactions (Brinck, Reddy, & Zahavu, , p. 140; Hodges & Fowler 2010), for example, in the rhythmic closings of telephone conversation (see Auer, ; De Jaegher, Peräkylä, & Stevanovic, ) and in many other “interaction rituals” (Collins, ; Goffman, ).…”

mentioning

confidence: 89%

Social deontics: A nano‐level approach to human power play

Stevanovic

2018

J Theory Soc Behav

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The notion of "deontic rights"-the capacity of an individual to determine action-is described as a tool to analyze human power plays in the turn-by-turn unfolding of social interaction. Drawing on various bodies of literature, the paper portrays the organization of the adjacency-pair sequence as the key locus of negotiation over deontic rights. How such negotiations happen in practice is also considered. Two deontic patterns instantiating themselves in sequential relations-deontic congruence and deontic incongruence-are discussed. Negotiations of deontic rights are suggested to take place specifically in and through three different forms of deontic incongruence, each of which involves a subtle mismatch between the claims of deontic rights of the first speaker and the recipient's treatment of these claims. These implicit power plays easily escape the eye and are therefore difficult to reflect upon and counteract by the participants themselves, which makes a thorough understanding of these mechanisms important.KEYWORDS authority, conversation analysis, deontics, power, sequentialityThis is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 89%

Social deontics: A nano‐level approach to human power play

Stevanovic

2018

J Theory Soc Behav

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Echoing the wellknown ethological refrain that 'nothing makes sense in biology except in the light of evolution' ( [56], p. 125), we would urge that social neuroscience should incorporate at least comparative neuroscience, developmental neuroscience, and input from sciences that study social interaction into its domain of study (see e.g. [57]). 1 This is not to say that we think that understanding the brain is sufficient for understanding cognition.…”

Section: Suggestions For Social Neurosciencementioning

confidence: 99%

What does the interactive brain hypothesis mean for social neuroscience? A dialogue

Jaegher

Paolo

Adolphs

2016

Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

One contribution of 15 to a theme issue 'Attending to and neglecting people'. A recent framework inspired by phenomenological philosophy, dynamical systems theory, embodied cognition and robotics has proposed the interactive brain hypothesis (IBH). Whereas mainstream social neuroscience views social cognition as arising solely from events in the brain, the IBH argues that social cognition requires, in addition, causal relations between the brain and the social environment. We discuss, in turn, the foundational claims for the IBH in its strongest form; classical views of cognition that can be raised against the IBH; a defence of the IBH in the light of these arguments; and a response to this. Our goal is to initiate a dialogue between cognitive neuroscience and enactive views of social cognition. We conclude by suggesting some new directions and emphases that social neuroscience might take.

show abstract

“…This is apparent particularly in those instances where the emergent patterns go against the individual participants' intentions and wishes; for example, there may be people with whom you always end up fighting with, and others to whom you regularly find yourself telling the same stupid jokes over and over again. In these instances, it is easy to see how interactional processes are capable of acquiring a certain autonomy of their own [23]. Still, even the most dynamic patterns of interpersonal behavior are never independent of the individual participants.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

On the Asperger experience of interaction: Interpersonal dynamics in dyadic conversations

Stevanovic¹,

Henttonen²,

Koski³

et al. 2017

J Autism

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We compared the patterns of affiliative and dominant behavior displayed in male dyads where one participant has Asperger's syndrome (AS) with those displayed in male dyads with two neurotypical (NT) participants. Drawing on interpersonal theory, according to which affiliation and dominance constitute two orthogonal axes of the "interpersonal circle," we used a computer-joystick apparatus to assess the participants' moment-to-moment affiliative and dominant behaviors throughout conversation. The patterns of affiliation and dominance were subsequently studied in relation to post-conversation questionnaires that targeted the interactional experiences of the participants in the two different types of dyads (AS dyads, NT dyads). We found the overall interpersonal notion of complementarity to hold for AS and NT dyads alike: greater affiliation in one participant invoked greater affiliation in the co-participant, and greater dominance invoked greater submissiveness in the co-participant. The AS and NT dyads, however, differed with regard to how affiliative and dominant behaviors related to each other during the time course of a single conversation. Furthermore, we found important differences between the AS and NT dyads in how the different patterns of affiliation and dominance were experienced by the participants. For example, a high level of affiliation synchrony was experienced in more negative terms by the participants in the AS dyads than by those in the NT dyads, while a high level of dominance coordination was experienced in more positive terms by the participants in the AS dyads than by those in the NT dyads. The paper increases understanding of the details of the interactional deficits associated with AS and of the conditions in which AS participants may get maximally positive interactional experiences. More generally, our study highlights the necessity to take the study of individual differences in the experiences of patterns of affiliation and dominance into the official agenda of empirical interaction research.

show abstract

The co-creation of meaningful action: bridging enaction and interactional sociology

Cited by 63 publications

References 70 publications

Social deontics: A nano‐level approach to human power play

Social deontics: A nano‐level approach to human power play

What does the interactive brain hypothesis mean for social neuroscience? A dialogue

On the Asperger experience of interaction: Interpersonal dynamics in dyadic conversations

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About