emcawiki - User contributions [en]

Unger-etal2025

2025-02-18T15:34:05Z

TomKoole: Created page with "{{BibEntry |BibType=ARTICLE |Author(s)=Unger, Sanne, Yfke Ongena & Tom Koole |Title=Expanded and non-conforming answers in standardized survey interviews |Tag(s)=EMCA; intervi..."

{{BibEntry
|BibType=ARTICLE
|Author(s)=Unger, Sanne, Yfke Ongena & Tom Koole
|Title=Expanded and non-conforming answers in standardized survey interviews
|Tag(s)=EMCA; interviewer-respondent interaction; conversation analysis; telephone surveys; survey methodology; question-answer sequences
|Key=Unger et al. 2025
|Year=2025
|Language=English
|Journal=Text & Talk
|Volume=45
|Number=1
|Pages=137-160
|DOI=https://doi.org/10.1515/text-2022-0157
|Abstract=Respondents in standardized survey interviews do not always answer closed-ended questions with just a type-conforming answer, such as “yes” or “three.” Instead, they sometimes expand the type-conforming answer or provide a response that does not contain a type-conforming answer. Standardized survey methodology aims to avoid such answers because they are found to cause interviewers to deviate from their script. However, we found that many expanded and non-conforming responses do not lead to intervention by the interviewer and are treated as unproblematic. A Conversation Analytic study of survey interviews, incorporating three different surveys, with recordings available for interviews varying in number between four and 430 interviews, shows that answer attempts can be divided into five types: four turn expansions (serial extras, uncertainty markers, prefaced answers, answers followed by elaborations), and non-conforming answers. Each of these targets a specific aspect of the interview situation. A follow-up quantitative analysis of 610 Computer-Assisted Telephone Interviews (CATI) shows that expanded answers are overwhelmingly accepted by interviewers, while non-conforming answers are in most cases followed by interviewer probing.
}}

Koole2023

2025-02-18T15:25:06Z

TomKoole: Created page with "{{BibEntry |BibType=ARTICLE |Author(s)=Tom Koole |Title=Meaning as referential work: Reflections on the research object of Interactional Semantics |Tag(s)=EMCA; interactional..."

{{BibEntry
|BibType=ARTICLE
|Author(s)=Tom Koole
|Title=Meaning as referential work: Reflections on the research object of Interactional Semantics
|Tag(s)=EMCA; interactional semantics; linguistic semantics; referential work; interactional linguistics; conversation analysis
|Key=Koole (2023)
|Year=2023
|Language=English
|Journal=Interactional Linguistics
|Volume=3
|Number=1/2
|Pages=167-177
|DOI=https://doi.org/10.1075/il.24008.koo
|Abstract=This epilogue to the Special Issue on Interactional Semantics discusses the contributions to the Special Issue in relation to other research to support three arguments. (i) The choice of Interactional Semantics to take the referential function of language (Jakobson) as its object of research is a welcome choice. (ii) The use of the term ‘meaning’ for this research object is potentially confusing and could be replaced by ‘referential work’. (iii) A research topic which could be included in Interactional Semantics and has not been articulated as such, is the way in which the choice of a referential expression establishes the referent as a particular social reality and is a tacit proposal to the interlocutors to talk about this referent in these terms.
}}

KooleGosen2024

2025-02-18T15:11:33Z

TomKoole: Created page with "{{BibEntry |BibType=ARTICLE |Author(s)=Tom Koole & Myrte N. Gosen |Title=Scopes of recipiency: An organization of responses to informings |Tag(s)=EMCA; conversation analysis;..."

{{BibEntry
|BibType=ARTICLE
|Author(s)=Tom Koole & Myrte N. Gosen
|Title=Scopes of recipiency: An organization of responses to informings
|Tag(s)=EMCA; conversation analysis; informing; Receipt practices; Multi-modality; Intersubjectivity; informedness
|Key=Koole & Gosen (2024)
|Year=2024
|Language=English
|Journal=Journal of Pragmatics
|Volume=222
|Pages=25-39
|Abstract=This paper is concerned with the organization of responses to informings. Using Conversation
Analysis, it will show that different receipting practices, including both embodied
and vocal ones, display differences in scope in response to informings. With these differences
in scope, recipients of informings can signal to the informing party that they
receipted either the just preceding part of the informing or the entire informing. The
positions of these practices follow a typology of four dimensions: embodied vs. vocal,
token vs. phrasal, semantically empty vs. semantically filled and rising vs. falling intonation.
When an informing is receipted by different practices of these pairs, the first type will
be used for small-scope recipiency while the second type will be used for large scope. This
organization of receipting practices illustrates how participants in informing sequences
can negotiate the completeness of the informing and the state of informedness of the
recipient.
}}

Balenvan-etal2024c

2025-02-18T15:05:33Z

TomKoole: Created page with "{{BibEntry |BibType=ARTICLE |Author(s)=Balen, Johanna van, Myrte N. Gosen. Siebrich de Vries & Tom Koole |Title=Peer-to-peer-talk in whole-classroom discussions |Tag(s)=EMCA;..."

{{BibEntry
|BibType=ARTICLE
|Author(s)=Balen, Johanna van, Myrte N. Gosen. Siebrich de Vries & Tom Koole
|Title=Peer-to-peer-talk in whole-classroom discussions
|Tag(s)=EMCA; Peer-to-peer-talk; whole-classroom discussions; assertions; challenges; conversation analysis; (dis)agreements
|Key=Balen, van et al. (2024c)
|Year=2024
|Language=English
|Journal=International Journal of Educational Research
|Volume=125
|DOI=https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2024.102354
|Abstract=During teacher guided whole-classroom discussions aimed at sharing perspectives in Dutch Language and Literature lessons, we observed stretches of peer-to-peer-talk. This conversation-analytic study zooms in on how these stretches of peer-to-peer-talk come about. Students are found to respond to each other mainly with challenges and assertions. A challenge is formulated as a wh-question, imperative, interrogative, declarative or phrasal and is used for questioning the given response, rather than obtaining information. An assertion is used to express a point of view and is formulated in two ways: as personal opinion, formulated in I-perspective, and as statement, formulated in second person singular or by the use of ‘generic you’. Both a challenge and an assertion elicit a following student contribution. A challenge mostly provokes a contribution in which a student expresses to stick to his/her point of view and an assertion mostly provokes a subsequent assertion in which agreement or disagreement is expressed. This study reveals that students work on each other’s contributions from moment to moment in interaction. The insights from this study can help teachers encourage dialogue during whole-classroom discussions.
}}

Balenvan-etal2024b

2025-02-18T14:57:42Z

TomKoole: Created page with "{{BibEntry |BibType=ARTICLE |Author(s)=Balen, Johanna van, Myrte N. Gosen, Siebrich de Vries & Tom Koole |Title=Taking Learner Initiatives within Classroom Discussions with Ro..."

{{BibEntry
|BibType=ARTICLE
|Author(s)=Balen, Johanna van, Myrte N. Gosen, Siebrich de Vries & Tom Koole
|Title=Taking Learner Initiatives within Classroom Discussions with Room for Subjectification
|Tag(s)=EMCA; Classroom Interaction; learner initiative; mothertongue education; subjectification; conversation analysis
|Key=Balen, van et al. (2024b)
|Year=2024
|Language=English
|Journal=Classroom Discourse
|Volume=15
|Number=2
|Pages=123-142
|DOI=https://doi.org/10.1080/19463014.2022.2128689
|Abstract=This study shows how learner initiatives are taken during classroomdiscussions where the teacher seeks to make room for subjectifica-tion. Using Conversation Analysis, subjectification can be observedwhen students take the freedom to express themselves as subjectsthrough learner initiatives. Drawing on data from classroom discus-sions in language and literature lessons in the mother tongue, theauthors find that learner initiatives can be observed in three differ-ent ways: agreement, request for information, counter-response.A learner initiative in the form of an agreement appears to functionmostly as a continuer and prompts the previous speaker to reclaimthe turn, while the I-R-F structure remains visible. In contrast, mak-ing a request for information or giving a counter-response ensuresmostly a breakthrough of the I-R-F-structure and leads toa dialogical participation framework in which multiple studentsparticipate. Findings illustrate that by making a request for informa-tion or giving a counter-response, students not only act as anindependent individual, but also encourage his peers to do so.
}}

Balen2024

2025-02-18T14:47:23Z

TomKoole: Created page with "{{BibEntry |BibType=ARTICLE |Author(s)=Balen, J. van, M.N. Gosen, S. de Vries & T. Koole |Title=‘What would you do if…?’: On asking Experience Questions within classroom..."

{{BibEntry
|BibType=ARTICLE
|Author(s)=Balen, J. van, M.N. Gosen, S. de Vries & T. Koole
|Title=‘What would you do if…?’: On asking Experience Questions within classroom discussions, with a view to making room for subjectification.
|Tag(s)=EMCA; Classroom Interaction; conversation analysis; Experience Questions; Subjectification; mother tongue education
|Key=Balen, van et al. (2024a)
|Year=2024
|Language=English
|Journal=Research on Children and Social Interaction
|Volume=8
|Number=1
|Pages=116-138
|Abstract=In this study, we observed classroom discussions in which teachers aimed to work on subjectification. Teachers were found to ask Experience Questions, which we define as questions that prompt the recipient to disclose how he/she would act or feel in a given situation. By applying Conversation Analysis, we show that post-expansion is provoked by either 1) inviting other students to respond to the initial response, 2) inviting the same student to elaborate on his/her response. When teachers invite other students, discussions are elicited that mostly involve cumulative lists of different responses to the initial Experience Question. When teachers invite the same student, discussions follow in which students take learner-initiatives to address the given response.
}}

Padmos2024

2025-02-18T14:36:17Z

TomKoole: Created page with "{{BibEntry |BibType=ARTICLE |Author(s)=Padmos, H., H. te Molder & T. Koole |Title=Dealing with the dual demands of expertise and democracy: How experts create proximity to the..."

{{BibEntry
|BibType=ARTICLE
|Author(s)=Padmos, H., H. te Molder & T. Koole
|Title=Dealing with the dual demands of expertise and democracy: How experts create proximity to the public without undermining their status as experts
|Tag(s)=EMCA; ordinary democracy; public participation; expertise; epistemics; reported speech; discursive psychology; conversation analysis
|Key=Padmos et al. 2024
|Year=2024
|Language=English
|Journal=Pragmatics and Society
|Volume=15
|Number=6
|Pages=858 – 883
|DOI=https://doi.org/10.1075/ps.22071.pad
|Abstract=Credible expertise is no longer a given in our contemporary democracy: for knowledge to be authoritative, experts must take into account a wider audience than just scientific colleagues. This study uses conversation analysis and discursive psychology to investigate how experts deal with this role in practice. We show that experts in a Dutch public hearing on GM food orient to ‘speaking on behalf of the public’ without undermining their status as experts. They do this by (1) animating but not overlapping the voices of the public (2) speaking on behalf of ‘the consumer’ and (3) presenting hypothetical public opinions. In this way, experts reconcile what they treat as the dual requirement of distance to support an expert opinion and the proximity to the public required for good democracy. We further discuss what implications this research has for the role of experts in a modern democracy.
}}

Ploegvander-etal2022

2025-02-17T16:17:52Z

TomKoole: Created page with "{{BibEntry |BibType=ARTICLE |Author(s)=Ploeg, Mara van der, Annerose Willemsen, Louisa Richter, Merel Keijzer & Tom Koole |Title=Requests for assistance in the third-age langu..."

{{BibEntry
|BibType=ARTICLE
|Author(s)=Ploeg, Mara van der, Annerose Willemsen, Louisa Richter, Merel Keijzer & Tom Koole
|Title=Requests for assistance in the third-age language classroom
|Tag(s)=EMCA; Third-age language learning; senior language-learning; ESL/EFL; Classroom Interaction; requests for assistance
|Key=Ploeg, van der et al. 2022
|Year=2022
|Language=English
|Journal=Classroom Discourse
|Volume=13
|Number=4
|Pages=386–406
|DOI=https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/19463014.2021.2013910
|Abstract=In this conversation analytic study, we investigate requests for assistance in the third-age (65+) language classroom. Seven Dutch seniors participated in a one-month course of English as a foreign language. We found that these seniors asked many languagerelated questions which fell into one of three categories: (1) production-oriented questions, (2) comprehension-oriented questions and (3) wonderment questions. These questions differ in the ways the sequences are shaped: (a) what precedes the request for assistance, (b) the person who is recruited to provide the assistance, (c)
the person who offers the assistance, and (d) the response to the provided assistance and the subsequent interaction. We found wonderment questions to be the most prevalent category. Our findings suggest that the senior learners in our data show clear ownership and agency over their own learning process, demonstrated by their active participation and frequent (wonderment) questions in the classroom.
}}

Jongeriu-etal2022

2025-02-17T16:08:17Z

TomKoole: Created page with "{{BibEntry |BibType=ARTICLE |Author(s)=Jongerius, Chiara, Marij Hillen, Ellen Smets, Hans Romijn & Tom Koole |Title=Physician gaze shifts in patient-physician interactions: f..."

{{BibEntry
|BibType=ARTICLE
|Author(s)=Jongerius, Chiara, Marij Hillen, Ellen Smets, Hans Romijn & Tom Koole
|Title=Physician gaze shifts in patient-physician interactions: functions, accounts and responses
|Tag(s)=EMCA;
|Key=Jongerius et al. 2022
|Year=2022
|Language=English
|Journal=Patient Education and Counselling
|Volume=105
|Number=7
|Pages=2116-2129
|DOI=https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2022.02.018
|Abstract=Objectives
Physician gaze towards patients is fundamental for medical consultations. Physicians’ use of Electronic Health Records (EHR) affects their gaze towards patients, and may negatively influence this interaction. We aimed to study conversation patterns during gaze shifts of physicians from the patient towards the EHR.
Methods
Outpatient consultations (N = 8) were eye-tracked. Interactions around physician gaze shifts towards the computer were transcribed.
Results
We found that physician gaze shifts have different interactional functions, e.g., introducing a topic switch or entering data into the EHR. Furthermore, physicians differ in how they account for their gaze shifts, i.e., both implicitly and explicitly. Third, patients vary in treating the gaze shift as an indication to continue their turn or not.
Conclusions
Our results suggest that physician gaze shifts vary in function, in how physicians account for them, and in how they influence the conversation. Future research should take into account distinctions when relating gaze to patient outcomes.
Practice implications
Physicians may be aware of the interactional context of their gaze behaviour. Patients respond differently to various types of gaze shifts. How physicians handle gaze shifts can therefore have different consequences for the interaction.
}}

Pulles-etal2022a

2025-02-17T15:55:45Z

TomKoole: Created page with "{{BibEntry |BibType=ARTICLE |Author(s)=Pulles, Maaike, Jan Berenst, Kees de Glopper & Tom Koole |Title=Children’s discussions about texts: integrating and evaluating practic..."

{{BibEntry
|BibType=ARTICLE
|Author(s)=Pulles, Maaike, Jan Berenst, Kees de Glopper & Tom Koole
|Title=Children’s discussions about texts: integrating and evaluating practices
|Tag(s)=EMCA; Dialogic reading; Classroom peer interaction; Primary education; Reading comprehension
|Key=Pulles et al. 2022a
|Year=2022
|Language=English
|Journal=Linguistics and Education
|Volume=69
|DOI=https://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2022.101051
|Abstract=This paper examines how primary school students discuss deeper comprehension and evaluation of text, while involved in dialogic reading in the context of inquiry learning. It takes a conversation analytic perspective on reading for understanding and critical reading. Analysis of the conversational details of peer talk, revealed how students collaboratively construct deeper meaning of text and take a more critical stance toward the text by means of integrating and evaluating actions. We found that how students understand and interpret the text, is reflected in different types of integrating practices they use: comparing text components with previous knowledge, giving additional information, applying information from the text to the present interactional situation. Evaluating practices, on the other hand, are also based on integrating actions, but they display an explicit critical stance to the text as well
}}

Balen2022

2025-02-17T15:48:48Z

TomKoole: Created page with "{{BibEntry |BibType=ARTICLE |Author(s)=Balen, Johanna van, Myrte N. Gosen, Siebrich de Vries & Tom Koole |Title=“What do you think?”: How interaction unfolds following opi..."

{{BibEntry
|BibType=ARTICLE
|Author(s)=Balen, Johanna van, Myrte N. Gosen, Siebrich de Vries & Tom Koole
|Title=“What do you think?”: How interaction unfolds following opinion-seeking questions and implications for encouraging subjectification in education
|Tag(s)=EMCA; Classroom Interaction; Subjectification; opinion-seeking question
|Key=Balen, van et al. 2022
|Year=2022
|Language=English
|Journal=Linguistics and Education
|Volume=69
|DOI=https://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2022.101037
|Abstract=This study investigates how classroom interaction unfolds following an opinion-seeking question asked by teachers or students. By using conversation analysis as a research method, the authors found that to an opinion-seeking question the preferred response of a student is to express an opinion as if it originated from their own thoughts. These responses are often followed by a non-minimal follow-up by both teachers and peers. We illustrate that the non-minimal follow-ups are formulated in two different ways: generic or specific, whereby a specific non-minimal follow-up appears to offer the best opportunity for subjectification. Subjectification is about the existence of the student as subject of his own life. If a student provides a specific non-minimal follow-up, the student expresses himself as a subject, with his own thoughts and a unique voice, which appears to prompt a dialogue in which fellow participants are also invited to express themselves.
}}

Gosen2017

2017-11-08T10:04:27Z

TomKoole: Created page with "{{BibEntry |BibType=ARTICLE |Author(s)=Myrte Gosen; Tom Koole; |Title=Conversation Analysis |Editor(s)=Dominic Wyse; Neil Selwyn; Emma Smith; Larry E. Suter |Tag(s)=EMCA; Con..."

{{BibEntry
|BibType=ARTICLE
|Author(s)=Myrte Gosen; Tom Koole;
|Title=Conversation Analysis
|Editor(s)=Dominic Wyse; Neil Selwyn; Emma Smith; Larry E. Suter
|Tag(s)=EMCA; Conversation Analysis; Education
|Key=Gosen2017
|Publisher=SAGE Publications Inc.
|Year=2017
|Language=English
|Chapter=39
|Address=London
|Booktitle=The BERA/SAGE Handbook of Educational Research
|Volume=2
|ISBN=978-1-4739-1891-7
}}

Schep-etal2016

2017-11-08T09:49:32Z

TomKoole: Created page with "{{BibEntry |BibType=ARTICLE |Author(s)=Ellen Schep; Tom Koole; Martine Noordegraaf |Title=Getting, receiving and holding attention: How adolescents’ telling initiatives work..."

{{BibEntry
|BibType=ARTICLE
|Author(s)=Ellen Schep; Tom Koole; Martine Noordegraaf
|Title=Getting, receiving and holding attention: How adolescents’ telling initiatives work
|Tag(s)=EMCA; Conversation Analysis; Initiations; Children
|Key=Koole-Schep2016
|Publisher=Garant Publishers
|Year=2016
|Language=English
|Journal=International Journal of Child and Family Welfare
|Volume=17
|Number=1/2
|Pages=1099-1105
|Abstract=This paper examines various ways in which adolescents during dinner table settings gain attention to start a telling varying from just a comment to storytelling. The settings are in family homes where professional parents run a household consisting of their biological children combined with a number of children and adolescents who are placed in that household for several years. Affective interaction between adolescents and their professional parents is important for the development of these youths. The method of Conversation Analysis has been used to analyse video data of dinner conversations in six households. These home situations were recorded by having cameras run every day from 4 pm to 7 pm over a period of three weeks. The telling initiations of the adolescents include verbal and embodied practices such as eye-gaze and body-movement in order to start a telling. The different kinds of initiations seem to produce different kinds of sequential responses from the professional parents. The analysis of the telling initiations by adolescents and the room they are given for these tellings is a contribution to the still limited knowledge about building and maintaining affective relationships between professional parents and adolescents in family home environments.
}}

Koole2017

2017-11-08T09:28:01Z

TomKoole: Created page with "{{BibEntry |BibType=ARTICLE |Author(s)=Tom Koole; Lotte van Burgsteden; Paulien Harms; Cleo C van Diemen; Irene M van Langen; 5GPM-team |Title=Participation in interdisciplina..."

{{BibEntry
|BibType=ARTICLE
|Author(s)=Tom Koole; Lotte van Burgsteden; Paulien Harms; Cleo C van Diemen; Irene M van Langen; 5GPM-team
|Title=Participation in interdisciplinary meetings on genetic diagnostics (NGS)
|Tag(s)=EMCA;
|Key=Koole2017
|Year=2017
|Language=English
|Month=October
|Journal=European Journal of Human Genetics
|Volume=25
|Number=10
|Pages=1099-1105
|DOI=10.1038/ejhg.2017.11
|Abstract=Diagnostics using next generation sequencing (NGS) requires high-quality interdisciplinary collaboration. In order to gain insight into this crucial collaborative process, we made video recordings of a new multidisciplinary team at work in the clinical genetics department of the University Medical Centre Groningen. Conversation Analysis was used to investigate the ways in which the team members deal with the disciplinary boundaries between them. We found that the team established different 'participation frames' in which to discuss recurring topics. Patients were discussed only by the medical doctors, whereas results of genetic tests were discussed by doctors, molecular biologists and genetic laboratory technicians. Information technology (IT) aspects were discussed by biologists, genetics analysts and bio-informaticians, but not doctors. We then interviewed team members who said they believed that the division of labour embodied in these participation frames contributes to achieving their team's goals.
}}