Providing Epistemic Support for Assessments Through Mobile-Supported Sharing Activities

References

• Aaltonen, T., Arminen, I., & Raudaskoski, A. (2014). Photo sharing as a joint activity between an aphasic speaker and others. In M. Nevile, P. Haddington, T. Heinemann, & M. Rauniomaa (Eds.), Interacting with objects: Language, materiality, and social activity (pp. 125–144). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Blackwell, N., & Fox Tree, J. E. (2012). Social factors affect quotative choice. Journal of Pragmatics, 44, 1150–1162. doi:10.1016/j.pragma.2012.05.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brown, B., McGregor, M., & McMillan, D. (2015). Searchable objects: Search in everyday conversation. Proceedings of the 18th ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work & Social Computing (pp. 508–517). New York, NY: ACM.
   Google Scholar
• Buchstaller, I. (2001). An alternative view of like: Its grammaticalisation in conversational American English and beyond. Edinburgh Working Papers in Applied Linguistics, 11, 21–41.
   Google Scholar
• Clift, R. (2006). Indexing stance: Reported speech as an interactional evidential. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 10, 569–595. doi:10.1111/josl.2006.10.issue-5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• DiDomenico, S. M., & Boase, J. (2013). Bringing mobiles into the conversation: Applying a conversation analytic approach to the study of mobiles in co-present interaction. In D. Tannen & A. Trester (Eds.), Discourse 2.0: Language and new media (pp. 119–131). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
   Google Scholar
• DiDomenico, S. M., Raclaw, J., & Robles, J. S. (2015, May). Answering the mobile summons: Managing multiple streams of communication across co-present and mediated modalities. International Communication Association Annual Conference, San Juan, Puerto Rico.
   Google Scholar
• Egbert, M. M. (1997). Schisming: The collaborative transformation from a single conversation to multiple conversations. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 30, 1–51. doi:10.1207/s15327973rlsi3001_1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fasulo, A., & Monzoni, C. (2009). Assessing mutable objects: A multimodal analysis. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 42, 362–376. doi:10.1080/08351810903296481
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ford, C. E., & Fox, B. A. (2011). Multiple practices for constructing laughables. In D. Barth-Weingarten, E. Reber, & M. Selting (Eds.), Prosody in interaction (pp. 182–193). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Gibson, J. J. (1977). The theory of affordances. In R. E. Shaw & J. Bransford (Eds.), Perceiving, acting, and knowing: Toward an ecological psychology (pp. 67–82). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Goffman, E. (1981). Forms of talk. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.
   Google Scholar
• Goodwin, C. (1996). Transparent vision. In E. Ohs, E. A. Schegloff, & S. A. Thompson (Eds.), Interaction and grammar (pp. 370–404). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hepburn, A., & Bolden, G. (2013). The conversation analytic approach to transcription. In J. Sidnell & T. Stivers (Eds.), The handbook of conversation analysis (pp. 57–76). Malden, MA: Blackwell.
   Google Scholar
• Heritage, J., & Raymond, G. (2005). The terms of agreement: Indexing epistemic authority and subordination in assessment sequences. Social Psychology Quarterly, 68, 15–38. doi:10.1177/019027250506800103
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holt, E. (2000). Reporting and reacting: Concurrent responses to reported speech. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 33, 425–454. doi:10.1207/S15327973RLSI3304_04
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hutchby, I. (2001). Conversation and technology: From the telephone to the internet. Cambridge, England: Polity Press.
   Google Scholar
• Jefferson, G. (1984). On the organization of laughter in talk about troubles. In J. M. Atkinson & J. C. Heritage (Eds.), Structures of social action: Studies in conversation analysis (pp. 346–369). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kidwell, M., & Zimmerman, D. H. (2007). Joint attention as action. Journal of Pragmatics, 39, 592–611. doi:10.1016/j.pragma.2006.07.012
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lindström, A., & Mondada, L. (2009). Assessments in social interaction: Introduction to the special issue. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 42, 299–308. doi:10.1080/08351810903296457
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ling, R. (2012). Taken for grantedness: The embedding of mobile communication into society. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Maynard, D. W. (2013). Defensive mechanisms: I-mean prefaced utterances in complaint and other conversational sequences. In M. Hayashi, G. Raymond, & J. Sidnell (Eds.), Conversational repair and human understanding (pp. 198–233). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Mondada, L. (2009). The methodical organization of talking and eating: Assessments in dinner conversations. Food Quality and Preference, 20, 558–571. doi:10.1016/j.foodqual.2009.03.006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mondada, L. (2011). Understanding as an embodied, situated and sequential achievement in interaction. Journal of Pragmatics, 43, 542–552. doi:10.1016/j.pragma.2010.08.019
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Monzoni, C. M., & Laury, R. (2016). Making referents accessible in multi-party interaction. Journal of Estonian and Finno-Ugric Linguistics, 6(2), 43–62.
   Google Scholar
• Nevile, M., Haddington, P., Heinemann, T., & Rauniomaa, M. (2014). On the interactional ecology of objects. In M. Neville, P. Haddington, T. Heinemann, & M. Rauniomaa (Eds.), Interacting with objects: Language, materiality, and social activity (pp. 3–26). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Pomerantz, A. (1984). Agreeing and disagreeing with assessments: Some features of preferred/dispreferred turn shapes. In J. M. Atkinson & J. Heritage (Eds.), Structures of social action: Studies in conversation analysis (pp. 57–101). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Raymond, G., & Heritage, J. (2006). The epistemics of social relations: Owning grandchildren. Language in Society, 35, 677–705. doi:10.1017/S0047404506060325
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ryave, A. L. (1978). On the achievement of a series of stories. In J. Schenkein (Ed.), Studies in the organization of conversational interaction (pp. 113–132). New York, NY: Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Schegloff, E. A. (1982). Discourse as an interactional achievement: Some uses of “uh huh” and other things that come between sentences. In D. Tannen (Ed.), Analyzing discourse: Text and talk (pp. 71–93). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Streeck, J., Goodwin, C., & LeBaron, C. (2011). Embodied interaction in the material world: An introduction. In J. Streeck, C. Goodwin, & C. LeBaron (Eds.), Embodied interaction: Language and body in the material world (pp. 1–28). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Weilenmann, A., & Larsson, C. (2001). Local use and sharing of mobile phones. In B. Brown & N. Green (Eds.), Wireless world: Social and interactional aspects of the mobile age (pp. 92–107). London, England: Springer-Verlag.
   Google Scholar