emcawiki - User contributions [en]

Greiffenhagen2026a

2026-09-11T15:09:06Z

StuartReeves: BibTeX auto import 2026-09-11 09:09:06

{{BibEntry
|Key=Greiffenhagen2026a
|Key=Greiffenhagen2026a
|Title=Handling troubles with discretion: Transforming informings into announcements in a control room behind a mixed-reality performance
|Author(s)=Christian Greiffenhagen; Stuart Reeves;
|Tag(s)=
|BibType=ARTICLE
|Publisher=Routledge
|Year=2026
|Journal=Research on Language and Social Interaction
|Volume=59
|Number=2
|Pages=149–170
|DOI=10.1080/08351813.2026.2623812
|Abstract=People often encounter troubles, which in co-present situations may involve the assistance of others. We investigate how a control room uses a particular division of labor to notice and handle troubles within a mixed-reality live performance: Monitors (tasked with noticing troubles of performers outside the control room) only inform directors about troubles; directors then may announce those troubles to performers (how to resolve them). We present two key findings: First, although informings typically contain trouble-formulations, these are often absent from the announcement, which allows directors to focus on the progressivity of the performance rather than topicalize the responsibility of trouble or the recurrence of the trouble. Second, directors avoid attributing responsibility for the trouble either by adopting agent-less formulations or by aggregating agency. Together, these practices allow directors to handle troubles “with discretion.” Data are in English.
}}

Reeves2025a

2026-09-11T15:05:41Z

StuartReeves: BibTeX auto import 2026-09-11 09:05:41

{{BibEntry
|Key=Reeves2025a
|Key=Reeves2025a
|Title=Opening Up Human-Robot Collaboration
|Author(s)=Stuart Reeves; Hannah R. M. Pelikan; Marina N. Cantarutti;
|Tag(s)=ethnomethodology; mobility; participation framework; public robots; social navigation
|BibType=ARTICLE
|Publisher=Association for Computing Machinery
|Address=New York, NY, USA
|Year=2025
|Month=oct
|Journal=Proc. ACM Hum.-Comput. Interact.
|Volume=9
|Number=CSCW7
|URL=https://doi.org/10.1145/3757640
|DOI=10.1145/3757640
|Abstract=As we see robots being deployed into new places in everyday life, questions arise about what `human-robot collaboration' (HRC) might look like there. At the same time, HRC researchers are looking to CSCW for better conceptualisations of `collaboration', and recent work has called for more CSCW-oriented studies of HRC to support this. We address this via an ethnomethodological study of encounters between pedestrians and food delivery robots on public streets. Our analysis—using video recorded fragments of what happens on the streets—demonstrates how passers-by continuously manage walking trajectories in ways that account for robot actions; specifically we articulate how people accomplish practices of \textitfollowing and overtaking robots, \textitpassing by and \textitcrossing paths with them. We then show that the picture of human-robot collaboration is drawn with distinct asymmetries of action and intelligibility, where humans contribute considerable work to get something that looks like `collaboration' achieved. This raises fundamental questions for how we talk about concepts of collaboration in HRC from a CSCW perspective, and how such notions can and should be applied to activities which include robots.
}}

Pelikan2024a

2026-09-11T15:05:41Z

StuartReeves: BibTeX auto import 2026-09-11 09:05:41

{{BibEntry
|Key=Pelikan2024a
|Key=Pelikan2024a
|Title=Encountering Autonomous Robots on Public Streets
|Author(s)=Hannah R. M. Pelikan; Stuart Reeves; Marina N. Cantarutti;
|Tag(s)=bystander; conversation analysis; delivery robots; ethnomethodology; public space; urban environments; video analysis
|Booktitle=Proceedings of the 2024 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction
|ISBN=9798400703225
|BibType=INPROCEEDINGS
|Series=HRI '24
|Publisher=Association for Computing Machinery
|Address=New York, NY, USA
|Year=2024
|Pages=561–571
|URL=https://doi.org/10.1145/3610977.3634936
|DOI=10.1145/3610977.3634936
|Note=\emph\textbfWinner of Best Paper Award
|Abstract=Robots deployed in public settings enter spaces that humans live and work in. Studies of HRI in public tend to prioritise direct and deliberate interactions. Yet this misses the most common form of response to robots, which ranges from subtle fleeting interactions to virtually ignoring them. Taking an ethnomethodological approach building on video recordings, we show how robots become embedded in urban spaces both from a perspective of the social assembly of the physical environment (the streetscape) and the socially organised nature of everyday street life. We show how such robots are effectively 'granted passage' through these spaces as a result of the practical work of the streets' human inhabitants. We detail the contingent nature of the streetscape, drawing attention to its various members and the accommodation work they are doing. We demonstrate the importance of studying robots during their whole deployment, and approaches that focus on members' interactional work.
}}

ReyesCruz2026a

2026-09-11T15:05:40Z

StuartReeves: BibTeX auto import 2026-09-11 09:05:40

{{BibEntry
|Key=ReyesCruz2026a
|Key=ReyesCruz2026a
|Title=On Being Guided: How People Follow a Robot-Guided Tour
|Author(s)=Gisela Reyes-Cruz; Stuart Reeves; Andriana Boudouraki; Dominic James Price; Joel E. Fischer; Praminda Caleb-Solly;
|Tag(s)=robot-guided tour; social robot navigation; socially aware robot navigation ethnomethodology; video analysis
|Booktitle=Proceedings of the 21st ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction
|ISBN=9798400721281
|BibType=INPROCEEDINGS
|Series=HRI '26
|Publisher=Association for Computing Machinery
|Address=New York, NY, USA
|Year=2026
|Pages=834–843
|URL=https://doi.org/10.1145/3757279.3785592
|DOI=10.1145/3757279.3785592
|Abstract=Being guided from one place to another is a pervasive social practice that connects deeply with socially aware robot navigation. We examine how robots come to feature within the organisation of these established and well-worn leading and following practices, practices which are assembled 'in place' by the efforts of individuals and groups that are using robot guides. We deployed mobile robots in a museum context to provide additional information for visitors around multiple sequential exhibits. Our ethnomethodological video-based analysis of interaction centres on how the social organisation of being guided was practically managed by visitors: in initiation of following, doing following, and finding a place to stop. Our study shows how following and being led is more than just a mechanical activity, and describe the implications for socially aware robot navigation in addressing novel technical challenges that a shift in understanding following-leading phenomena presents.
}}

EMCA Organizations

2025-07-04T13:02:46Z

StuartReeves: /* United Kingdom */

'''NB: At the moment this page is not maintained. If you would be willing to maintain this list and add to it from time to time, please get in touch with admins@emcawiki.net.'''

If your organization - or an organization you know of is missing from this list, please add it yourself (if you have a login), or get in touch with the EMCA wiki admins (admins@emcawiki.net). We can either create you an account or add the information on your behalf.

= International Organizations =

* [https://pragmatics.international International Pragmatics Association (IPrA)]
* [http://www.iiemca.org/ The International Institute for Ethnomethodology and Conversation Analysis (IIEMCA)]
* [http://isca.clubexpress.com/ International Society for Conversation Analysis (ISCA)]
* [https://www.isa-sociology.org/en/research-networks/research-committees/rc25-language-and-society/ International Sociological Association Language and Society Committee]
* [http://www.gesturestudies.com International Society for Gesture Studies]
* [https://www.icahdq.org International Communication Association]
* [https://sites.google.com/york.ac.uk/remotedatasessions/home Remote Data Sessions]

= National / regional organizations =

== Australasia ==
* [http://aiemca.org/ Australasian Institute for Ethnomethodology and Conversation Analysis (AIEMCA)]

== Australia ==
* [https://aiemca.org/groups/brisbane-tag/ Brisbane TAG]
* [https://aiemca.org/groups/canberra-dag/ Canberra DAG]
* [https://aiemca.org/groups/melbourne-cag/ Melbourne CAG]
* [https://aiemca.org/groups/sydney-cais/ Sydney CAIS]

== Denmark ==
* [http://mls.sdu.dk/mailman/listinfo/movin Aarhus, Aalborg, Kolding, Odense … (Denmark): MOVIN]

== Hong Kong / Macao ==
* [http://www.soc.cuhk.edu.hk/HKGMACEMCA.html Hong Kong-Macao Ethnomethodology and Conversation Analysis Group]

== Japan ==
* [http://emca.jp/ Japanese Association of Ethnomethodology and Conversation Analysis]

== United Kingdom ==
* [https://emcadoctoralnetwork.wordpress.com The EMCA Doctoral Network]: a UK-based network for doctoral training
* [https://www.sedit.org.uk Scottish Ethnomethodology, Discourse, Interaction & Talk (Group)]

== USA ==
* [http://www.asanet.org/asa-communities/sections/ethnomethodology-and-conversation-analysis ASA section on Ethnomethodology and Conversational Analysis]
* [http://www.nca-lsi.org/ Language and Social Interaction Devision of the (US) National Communication Association]
* [http://linguisticanthropology.org The Society for Linguistic Anthropology (American Anthropological Association)]

= EMCA groups =

To add your EMCA team or research group to the list email admins@emcawiki.net

== Denmark ==
* [https://pipe.sdu.dk Professional Interaction and Practice group at the University of Southern Denmark]

== Finland ==
* [http://www.oulu.fi/coact/ COACT - Complexity of (inter)action and multimodal participation]

== France ==
* [http://icar.univ-lyon2.fr/ Interactions, Corpus, Apprentissages, Représentations] ENS de Lyon Université Lyon 2

== Germany ==
* [http://www1.ids-mannheim.de Das Institut für Deutsche Sprache], Mannheim, Germany

== Netherlands ==
* [http://anela.nl/en/who-are-we/werkgroepen/awia/ AWIA – Anéla Werkgroep Interactieanalyse]

== Portugal ==
* [http://geacclissis.wordpress.com/ GEACC-Clissis: Grupo de Etnometodologia e AnÃ¡lise Conversacional da Clusividade Social], Portugal

== Sweden ==
* [https://old.liu.se/ikk/ffu/ske/samtals-och-interaktionsseminariet?l=sv Samtals- och interaktionsseminariet – SIS]

== Turkey ==
* [https://microanalysisnetwork.com Micro Analysis Network, Turkey]

== United Kingdom ==
* [https://twitter.com/CARDSatUU Conversation Analysis Reading and Data Sessions, Ulster University]
* [http://www.lboro.ac.uk/departments/socialsciences/research/darg/ The Discourse and Rhetoric Group, Loughborough University]
* [https://www.york.ac.uk/language/research/centres/caslc/ Centre for Advanced Studies in Language and Communication, University of York]
* [https://www2.le.ac.uk/departments/psychology/research/child-mental-health/lira The Language and Interaction Research Assembly, University of Leicester]
* [https://blogs.ncl.ac.uk/alc/2015/10/05/about-micro-analysis-research-group-marg/ Micro-Analysis Research Group (MARG), Newcastle University]
* [https://www.kcl.ac.uk/study/postgraduate/research-groups/work,-interaction-and-technology.aspx Work, Interaction & Technology Research Group], The Management Centre, King's College London
* [http://www.ucl.ac.uk/pals/research/languagecomm/cair UCL (UK) Centre for Applied Action Research (CAIR)]
* [[CA Data Sessions South]]
* [https://people.cs.nott.ac.uk/pszsr/sit/ Social Interaction and Technology special interest group (SIT@MRL)], University of Nottingham
* [https://www.cardiff.ac.uk/research/explore/research-units/ethnomethodology-ethnography-interaction-and-talk CEEIT (Cardiff Ethnomethodology, Ethnography, Interaction and Talk)], Cardiff University

== USA ==
* [https://clic.ss.ucla.edu UCLA Centre for Language Interaction and Culture]
* [http://rucal.rutgers.edu/ RUCAL: Rutgers University Conversation Analysis Lab]
* [http://www.liso.ucsb.edu Language Interaction and Social Organization] at UC Santa Barbara
* [https://www.tc.columbia.edu/lansi/ Language and Social Interaction Working Group] at Teacher's College Columbia University, NY
* [http://uwiig.blogspot.com/ UW Interaction Interest Group] (UWIIG), University of Wisconsin
* [https://www.aaal.org/dis American Association of Applied Linguistics] Discourse Section
* [https://www.colorado.edu/program/clasp/ Culture Language and Social Practice], UC Boulder
== VIETNAM ==
[[User:VietCA|VietCA]]

= Open Research Networks =

An open research network is an informal gathering of EMCA researchers, usually pursuing a specific topical or regional focus. See [[How to form an EMCA research network]].

* [[EMCA AI research network]]

= Closed / archived =

Projects or groups that are no longer active

* [http://blogs.helsinki.fi/intersubjectivity/ Finnish Centre of Excellence for Intersubjectivity] (2012-2017)
* [http://www.staff.uni-giessen.de/~g31047/eingangsseite.html Telekooperation], University of Giessen, Germany (last update 1997)
* [http://www2.nordiska.uu.se/convnet/ Nordic Network for Researchers in Conversation Studies] (Page not updated since 2009)

Smith2020b

2020-12-23T23:01:58Z

StuartReeves: BibTeX auto import 2020-12-23 11:01:58

{{BibEntry
|Key=Smith2020b
|Key=Smith2020b
|Title=``Off the beaten track'': Navigating with digital maps on moorland
|Author(s)=Thomas A. Smith; Eric Laurier; Stuart Reeves; Ria Dunkley
|Tag(s)=EMCA
|BibType=ARTICLE
|Year=2020
|Month=March
|Journal=Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers
|Volume=45
|Pages=1–18
|DOI=10.1111/tran.12336
|Abstract=Resources made available through the digital map app change but do not replace, the skills of ``ordinary wayfinding.'' Looking at the challenges of wayfinding with new mobile devices helps inform the development of digital mapping tools for navigating through difficult terrain. With this background in mind, in this paper we consider how the contemporary navigational resources of mobile devices with GPS, and the resources of countryside landscape features, are brought together in visiting a tourist site. We analyse video data from groups walking across unfamiliar moorland terrain, following a guide and map app which takes them on a tour of a remote Roman marching camp in the Brecon Beacons National Park, Wales. Following an ethnomethodological and conversation analytic approach, we examine three instances of navigational work for paired walkers as they traverse the moorland. The three fragments are of: an orientational struggle to establish where to go next; a routine check to select a path; and the discovery of a feature mentioned in the guide. Across the three episodes we explicate how our walkers make sense of the guide and map in relation to investigating the moorland surface. We examine how their ambulatory and undulatory practices on the moorland are tied to their wayfinding practices. While we analyse wayfinding talk, we also attend to the mobile practices of stopping and pausing as part of practical navigational reasoning.
}}

Fischer2019

2020-12-23T23:00:16Z

StuartReeves: BibTeX auto import 2020-12-23 11:00:16

{{BibEntry
|Key=Fischer2019
|Key=Fischer2019
|Title=Progressivity for Voice Interface Design
|Author(s)=Joel E. Fischer; Stuart Reeves; Martin Porcheron; Rein Sikveland
|Tag(s)=EMCA; VUI; conversation analysis; design; speech; voice
|Booktitle=Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Conversational User Interfaces
|ISBN=978-1-4503-7187-2
|BibType=INPROCEEDINGS
|Series=CUI '19
|Publisher=ACM
|Address=New York, NY, USA
|Year=2019
|Month=August
|Pages=26:1–26:8
|URL=http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/3342775.3342788
|DOI=10.1145/3342775.3342788
|Note=\emph\textbfWinner of Best Paper Award
|Abstract=Drawing from Conversation Analysis (CA), we examine how the orientation towards progressivity in talk-keeping things moving-might help us better understand and design for voice interactions. We introduce progressivity by surveying its explication in CA, and then look at how a strong preference for progressivity in conversation works out practically in sequences of voice interaction recorded in people's homes. Following Stivers and Robinson's work on progressivity, we find our data shows: how non-answer responses impede progress; how accounts offered for non-answer responses can lead to recovery; how participants work to receive answers; and how, ultimately, moving the interaction forwards does not necessarily involve a fitted answer, but other kinds of responses as well. We discuss the wider potential of applying progressivity to evaluate and understand voice interactions, and consider what designers of voice experiences might do to design for progressivity. Our contribution is a demonstration of the progressivity principle and its interactional features, which also points towards the need for specific kinds of future developments in speech technology.
}}

Boudouraki2020

2020-12-23T23:00:16Z

StuartReeves: BibTeX auto import 2020-12-23 11:00:16

{{BibEntry
|Key=Boudouraki2020
|Key=Boudouraki2020
|Title=``I can't get round'': Recruiting Assistance in Mobile Robotic Telepresence
|Author(s)=Andriana Boudouraki; Joel E. Fischer; Stuart Reeves; Sean Rintel
|Tag(s)=EMCA; mobile robotic telepresence; remote work; remote help; videoconferencing; computer-mediated communication; asymmetry; ethnomethodology; conversation analysis
|BibType=ARTICLE
|Publisher=Association for Computing Machinery
|Address=New York, NY, USA
|Year=2020
|Month=Dec
|Journal=Proc. ACM Hum.-Comput. Interact.
|Volume=4
|Number=CSCW3
|DOI=10.1145/3432947
|Note=\textit\textbfWinner of a CSCW 2020 Honourable Mention Award
|Abstract=Via audiovisual communications and a controllable physical embodiment, Mobile Robotic telePresence (MRP) systems aim to support enhanced collaboration between remote and local members of a given setting. But MRP systems also put the remote user in positions where they frequently rely on the help of local partners. Getting or `recruiting' such help can be done with various verbal and embodied actions ranging in explicitness. In this paper, we look at how such recruitment occurs in video data drawn from an experiment where pairs of participants (one local, one remote) performed a timed searching task. We find a prevalence of implicit recruitment methods and outline obstacles to effective recruitment that emerge due to communicative asymmetries that are built into MRP design. In a future where remote work becomes widespread, assistance through remote work technology like MRPs needs close examination at a fundamental interactional level, taking into account how communicative asymmetries are at play in everyday use of such technologies.
}}

Porcheron2020

2020-12-23T23:00:16Z

StuartReeves: BibTeX auto import 2020-12-23 11:00:16

{{BibEntry
|Key=Porcheron2020
|Key=Porcheron2020
|Title=Pulling Back the Curtain on the Wizards of Oz
|Author(s)=Martin Porcheron; Joel E. Fischer; Stuart Reeves
|Tag(s)=EMCA; woz; natural language interfaces; voice interfaces; vuis; robots; ethnography; ethnomethodology; cscw
|BibType=ARTICLE
|Publisher=Association for Computing Machinery
|Address=New York, NY, USA
|Year=2020
|Month=Dec
|Journal=Proc. ACM Hum.-Comput. Interact.
|Volume=4
|Number=CSCW3
|DOI=10.1145/3432942
|Abstract=The Wizard of Oz method is an increasingly common practice in HCI and CSCW studies as part of iterative design processes for interactive systems. Instead of designing a fully-fledged system, the `technical work' of key system components is completed by human operators yet presented to study participants as if computed by a machine. Yet, little is known about how Wizard of Oz studies are interactionally and collaboratively achieved in situ by researchers and participants. By adopting ethnomethodological perspective, we analyse our use of the method in studies with a voice-controlled vacuum robot \changeand two researchers present. We present data that reveals the work of how such studies are organised and presented to participants and unpack the coordinated orchestration work that unfolds `behind the scenes' to complete the study. We examine how the researchers attend to participant requests and technical breakdowns, and discuss the performative, collaborative, and methodological nature of their work. We conclude by offering insights from our application of the approach to others in the HCI and CSCW communities for applying the method.
}}

Reeves2019

2020-12-23T23:00:15Z

StuartReeves: BibTeX auto import 2020-12-23 11:00:14

{{BibEntry
|Key=Reeves2019
|Key=Reeves2019
|Title='This is Not What We Wanted': Designing for Conversation with Voice Interfaces
|Author(s)=Stuart Reeves; Martin Porcheron; Joel Fischer
|Tag(s)=EMCA
|BibType=ARTICLE
|Publisher=ACM
|Address=New York, NY, USA
|Year=2018
|Month=dec
|Journal=Interactions
|Volume=26
|Number=1
|Pages=46–51
|URL=http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/3296699
|DOI=10.1145/3296699
}}

Reeves2019a

2020-12-23T23:00:15Z

StuartReeves: BibTeX auto import 2020-12-23 11:00:15

{{BibEntry
|Key=Reeves2019a
|Key=Reeves2019a
|Title=How UX practitioners produce findings in usability testing
|Author(s)=Stuart Reeves
|Tag(s)=EMCA; Usability testing; conversation analysis; ethnomethodology; work practice
|BibType=ARTICLE
|Publisher=ACM
|Address=New York, NY, USA
|Year=2019
|Month=jan
|Journal=ACM Trans. Comput.-Hum. Interact.
|Volume=26
|Number=1
|Pages=3:1–3:38
|URL=http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/3299096
|DOI=10.1145/3299096
|Abstract=Usability testing has long been a core interest of HCI research and forms a key element of industry practice. Yet our knowledge of it harbours striking absences. There are few, if any detailed accounts of the contingent, material ways in which usability testing is actually practiced. Further, it is rare that industry practitioners' testing work is treated as indigenous and particular (instead subordinated as a `compromised' version). To service these problems, this paper presents an ethnomethodological study of usability testing practices in a design consultancy. It unpacks how findings are produced in and as the work of observers analysing the test as it unfolds between moderators taking participants through relevant tasks. The study nuances conventional views of usability findings as straightforwardly `there to be found' or `read off' by competent evaluators. It explores how evaluators / observers collaboratively work to locate relevant troubles in the test's unfolding. However, in the course of doing this work, potential candidate troubles may also routinely be dissipated and effectively `ignored' in one way or another. The implications of the study suggest refinements to current understandings of usability evaluations, and affirm the value to HCI in studying industry practitioners more deeply.
}}