emcawiki - User contributions [en]

Puetz2018

2023-09-12T11:01:33Z

OlePütz: BibTeX auto import 2023-09-12 05:01:32

{{BibEntry
|Key=Puetz2018
|Key=Puetz2018
|Title=How Strangers Initiate Conversations: Interactions on Public Trains in Germany
|Author(s)=Ole Pütz
|Tag(s)=EMCA
|BibType=ARTICLE
|Year=2018
|Journal=Journal of Contemporary Ethnography
|Volume=47
|Number=4
|Pages=426-453
|URL=https://doi.org/10.1177/0891241617697792
|DOI=10.1177/0891241617697792
|Abstract=This article considers how strangers who use public transportation initiate conversations and how disruptions of the transportation system affect interactions among strangers. How conversations are initiated has rarely been discussed in the literature because the majority of research takes the initiation of talk for granted. Building on Goffman, the article tests two hypotheses that explain how strangers initiate conversations. The first hypothesis states that travelers rely on interactional rituals if they have to talk with others because of a rule against opening talk with strangers, a rule that can be relaxed if travelers are faced with disruptive events. The second hypothesis states that a conversation can be initiated without introductory remarks if a traveler’s focus of attention is discernible to another traveler, irrespective of the circumstances travelers find themselves in. I argue that the latter hypothesis better explains how strangers initiate conversations and discuss how this finding may be generalized.
}}

Puetz2019

2023-09-12T11:01:33Z

OlePütz: BibTeX auto import 2023-09-12 05:01:33

{{BibEntry
|Key=Puetz2019
|Key=Puetz2019
|Title=Common Understandings of and Consensus About Collective Action: The Transformation of Specifically Vague Proposals as a Collective Achievement
|Author(s)=Ole Pütz
|Tag(s)=EMCA
|BibType=ARTICLE
|Year=2019
|Journal=Human Studies
|Volume=42
|Number=3
|Pages=483–512
|URL=https://doi.org/10.1007/s10746-019-09495-6
|DOI=10.1007/s10746-019-09495-6
|Abstract=This paper asks how anti-nuclear activists form collectives that are able to act collectively. It argues that shared interests and collective identities only insufficiently explain the emergence of collective action. Alternatively, the paper investigates meeting talk of German anti-nuclear groups where activists discuss proposals for collective action. Based on audio recordings, a sequential analysis of activists’ deliberations traces the transformation of vague ideas into concrete and collectively agreed to proposals. It is shown how the process by which activists reach a common understanding about a particular protest activity—as something that is being talked about here and now—and the process of becoming an acting collectivity—a group that is ready to carry out this protest activity in the future—are interdependent. Activists make use of “indexicality” (Garfinkel) to introduce specifically vague proposals, enabling others to respond and contribute to the emerging proposal while group agency is suspended. At first, the authorship of proposals is minimized. Step by step, vague proposals are specified by meeting participants until a “change in footing” (Goffman) marks group consensus. While the group emerges as the author and principal of proposals through this process, the paper shows that implementation relies on individual principals again who take responsibility during and after the meeting.
}}

Puetz2019a

2023-09-12T11:01:33Z

OlePütz: BibTeX auto import 2023-09-12 05:01:33

{{BibEntry
|Key=Puetz2019a
|Key=Puetz2019a
|Title=Talking Collective Action: A Sequential Analysis of Strategic Planning in Anti-Nuclear Groups
|Author(s)=Ole Pütz
|Tag(s)=EMCA
|BibType=BOOK
|Publisher=Abingdon: Routledge
|Year=2019
|URL=https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429032110
|DOI=10.4324/9780429032110
}}

Puetz2021

2023-09-12T11:01:33Z

OlePütz: BibTeX auto import 2023-09-12 05:01:33

{{BibEntry
|Key=Puetz2021
|Key=Puetz2021
|Title=Managing exactness and vagueness in computer science work: Programming and self-repair in meetings
|Author(s)=Ole Pütz
|Tag(s)=EMCA, EMCA AI
|BibType=ARTICLE
|Year=2021
|Journal=Social Studies of Science
|Volume=51
|Number=6
|Pages=938–961
|URL=https://doi.org/10.1177/03063127211010972
|DOI=10.1177/03063127211010972
|Abstract=The formulation of computer algorithms requires the elimination of vagueness. This elimination of vagueness requires exactness in programming, and this exactness can be traced to meeting talk, where it intersects with the indexicality of expressions. This article is concerned with sequences in which a team of computer scientists discuss the functionality of prototypes that are already implemented or possibly to be implemented. The analysis focuses on self-repair because this is a practice where participants can be seen to orient to meanings of different expressions as alternatives. By using self-repair, the computer scientists show a concern with exact descriptions when they talk about existing functionality of their prototypes but not when they talk about potential future functionality. Instead, when participants talk about potential future functionality and attend to meanings during self-repair, they use vague expressions to indicate possibilities. Furthermore, when the computer scientists talk to external stakeholders, they indicate through hedges whenever their descriptions approximate already implemented technical functionality but do not describe it exactly. The article considers whether the code of working prototypes can be said to fix meanings of expressions and how we may account for human agency and non-human resistances during development.
}}