Respecifying Mediated Interaction

References

• Aaltonen, T., Arminen, I., & Raudakoski, R. (2014). Photo sharing as a joint activity. In P. Haddington, M. Neville, T. Heinemann, & M. Rauniomaa (Eds.), Interacting with objects: Language, materiality and social activity (pp. 125–144). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Arminen, I. (2005a). Institutional interaction: Studies of talk at work. Aldershot, England: Ashgate.
   Google Scholar
• Arminen, I. (2005b). Sequential order and sequence structure. The case of incommensurable studies on mobile phone calls. Discourse Studies, 7(6), 649–662. doi:10.1177/1461445605055421
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arminen, I., & Leinonen, M. (2006). Mobile phone call openings: Tailoring answers to personalized summonses. Discourse Studies, 8(3), 339–368. doi:10.1177/1461445606061791
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arminen, I., & Weilenmann, A. (2009). Mobile presence and intimacy—Reshaping social actions in mobile contextual configuration. Journal of Pragmatics, 41(10), 1905–1923. doi:10.1016/j.pragma.2008.09.016
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ayaß, R. (2014). Using media as involvement shields. Journal of Pragmatics, 72, 5–17. doi:10.1016/j.pragma.2014.02.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baym, N. K. (1996). Agreements and disagreements in a computer-mediated discussion. Research on Language & Social Interaction, 29(4), 315–345. doi:10.1207/s15327973rlsi2904_2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chomsky, N. (1965). Aspects of the theory of syntax. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Crabtree, A., & Rodden, T. (2008). Hybrid ecologies: Understanding cooperative interaction in emerging physical-digital environments. Personal and Ubiquitous Computing, 12, 481–493. doi:10.1007/s00779-007-0142-7
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• De Fornel, M. (1994). Le cadre interactionnel de l’échange visiophonique [International framework of the videophone exchange]. Réseaux, 64, 107–132. doi:10.3406/reso.1994.2473
   Google Scholar
• Drew, P., & Heritage, J. (Eds.). (1992). Talk at work. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Due, B. (2015). The social construction of a Glasshole: Google glass and multiactivity in social interaction. PsychNology Journal, 13(2–3), 149–178.
   Google Scholar
• Ekberg, S., Shaw, A. R. H., Kessler, D. S., Malpass, A., & Barnes, R. K. (2016 /this issue). Orienting to emotion in computer-mediated cognitive behavioral therapy. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 49, 310–324. doi:10.1080/08351813.2016.1199085
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Esbjörnsson, M., Juhlin, O., & Weilenmann, A. (2007). Drivers using mobile phones in traffic: An ethnographic study of interactional adaptation. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 22(1–2), 37–58. doi:10.1207/s15327590ijhc2201-02_3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Forrester, M. (1999). Conversation and instruction with apprenticeship: Affordances for learning. In P. Ainley & H. Rainbird (Eds.), Apprenticeship: Towards a new paradigm of learning (pp. 86–97). London, England: Kogan Page.
   Google Scholar
• Gallagher, S., & Zahavi, D. (2008). The phenomenological mind. London, England: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Garcia, A., & Jacobs, J. (1999). The eyes of the beholder: Understanding the turn taking system in quasi-synchronous computer mediated communication. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 32(4), 337–367. doi:10.1207/S15327973rls3204_2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gehle, R., Pitsch, K., & Wrede, S. (2014, October). Signaling trouble in robot-to-group interaction. Emerging visitor dynamics with a museum guide robot. In Proceedings of the second international Conference on Human-Agent Interaction (pp. 361–368). New York, NY: ACM.
   Google Scholar
• Gibson, E. J., & Pick, A. D. (2000). An ecological approach to perceptual learning and development. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gibson, J. J. (1979). The ecological approach to visual perception. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
   Google Scholar
• Giles, D., Stommel, W., Paulus, T., Lester, J., & Reed, D. (2015). Microanalysis of online data: The methodological development of “digital CA.” Discourse, Context & Media, 7, 41–51. doi:10.1016/j.dcm.2014.12.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goffman, E. (1963). Behavior in public places. New York, NY: Free Press.
   Google Scholar
• Goffman, E. (1974). Frame analysis: An essay on the organization of experience. New York, NY: Harper and Row.
   Google Scholar
• Goodwin, C. (1995). Seeing in depth. Social Studies of Science, 25(2), 237–274. doi:10.1177/030631295025002002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goodwin, C. (2000). Action and embodiment within situated human interaction. Journal of Pragmatics, 32(10), 1489–1522. doi:10.1016/S0378-2166(99)00096-X
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goodwin, C., & Goodwin, M. (1996). Seeing as a situated activity: Formulating planes. In Y. Engestrom & D. Middleton (Eds.), Cognition and communication at work (pp. 61–95). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Haddington, P., Keisanen, T., Mondada, L., & Nevile, M. (2014). Towards multiactivity as a social and interactional phenomenon. In P. Haddington, T. Keisanen, L. Mondada, & M. Nevile (Eds.), Multiactivity in social interaction: Beyond multitasking (pp. 3–32). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Haddington, P., & Rauniomaa, M. (2011). Technologies, multitasking and driving: Attending to and preparing for a mobile phone conversation in a car. Human Communication Research, 37, 223–254. doi:10.1111/hcre.2011.37.issue-2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heath, C., & Luff, P. (1993). Disembodied conduct: Interactional asymmetries in video-mediated communication. In G. Button (Ed.), Technology in working order: Studies of work, interaction, and technology (pp. 35–54). London, England: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Heritage, J., & Clayman, S. (2010). Talk in action: Interactions, identities and institutions. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.
   Google Scholar
• Herring, S. C. (1999). Interactional coherence in CMC. Journal of Computer‐Mediated Communication, 4(4). doi:10.1111/j.1083-6101.1999.tb00106.x
   Google Scholar
• Herring, S. C. (2013). Relevance in computer-mediated conversation. In S. C. Herring, D. Stein, & T. Virtanen (Eds.), Pragmatics of Computer-Mediated Communication (pp. 245–268). Berlin, Germany: Mouton de Gruyter.
   Google Scholar
• Hillis, K. (1999). Digital sensations: Space, identity and embodiment in virtual reality. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hindmarsh, J., & Heath, C. (2000). Sharing the tools of the trade. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 29(5), 523–562. doi:10.1177/089124100129023990
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hjulstad, J. (2016 /this issue). Practices of organizing built space in videoconference mediated interactions. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 49, 325–341. doi:10.1080/08351813.2016.1199087
   Google Scholar
• Hutchby, I. (2001a). Technologies, texts and affordances. Sociology, 35(2), 441–456. doi:10.1177/S0038038501000219
   Google Scholar
• Hutchby, I. (2001b). Conversation and technology: From the telephone to the Internet. Cambridge, England: Polity Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hutchby, I. (2003). Affordances and the analysis of technologically-mediated interaction. Sociology, 37, 581–589. doi:10.1177/00380385030373011
   Google Scholar
• Hutchby, I., & Tanna, V. (2008). Aspects of sequential organization in text message exchange. Discourse & Communication, 2(2), 143–164. doi:10.1177/1750481307088481
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hutchby, I., & Wooffitt, R. (2008). Conversation analysis. Cambridge, England: Polity Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hutchins, E. (1995). Cognition in the wild. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Jenks, C. J. (2011). Transcribing talk and interaction: Issues in the representation of communication data. Amsterdam, The Netherlands/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Keating, E., & Mirus, G. (2003). American Sign Language in virtual space: Interactions between deaf users of computer-mediated video communication and the impact of technology on language practices. Language in Society, 32(5), 693–714. doi:10.1017/S0047404503325047
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kern, S. (2003). The culture of time and space, 1880–1918. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lanchantin, T., Simoës-Perlant, A., & Largy, P. (2015). The amount of modifications (textism) related to spelling level in French. PsychNology Journal, 13(1), 7–56.
   Google Scholar
• Latour, B. (2005). Reassembling the social: An introduction to actor-network theory. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lerner, G., & Zimmerman, D. (2003). Action and the appearance of action in the conduct of very young children. In P. Glenn, C. LeBaron, & J. Mandelbaum (Eds.), Studies in language and social interaction (pp. 441–457). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Licoppe, C. (2004). “Connected” presence: The emergence of a new repertoire for managing social relationships in a changing communication technoscape. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 22(1), 135–156. doi:10.1068/d323t
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Licoppe, C. (2013). Merging mobile communication studies and urban research: Mobile locative media, “onscreen encounters” and the reshaping of the interaction order in public places. Mobile Media & Communication, 1(1), 122–128. doi:10.1177/2050157912464488
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Licoppe, C. (2015). Video communication and “camera actions”: The production of wide video shots in courtrooms with remote defendants. Journal of Pragmatics, 76, 117–134. doi:10.1016/j.pragma.2014.11.008
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Licoppe, C. (2016). Mobilities and urban encounters in public places in the age of locative media: Seams, folds and encounters with “pseudonymous strangers.” Mobilities, 11(1), 99–116. doi:10.1080/17450101.2015.1097035
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Licoppe, C., & Dumoulin, L. (2010). The “curious case” of an unspoken opening speech act: A video-ethnography of the use of video communication in courtroom activities. Research on Language & Social Interaction, 43(3), 211–231. doi:10.1080/08351811003741319
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Licoppe, C., & Figeac, J. (2014). Direct video observation of the uses of smartphone on the move: Reconceptualizing mobile multi-activity. In A. De Souza E Silva & M. Sheller (Eds.), Mobility and locative media: Mobile communication in hybrid spaces (pp. 48–64). London, England: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Licoppe, C., & Inada, Y. (2009). Recognizing mutual “proximity” at a distance: Weaving together mobility, sociality and technology. Journal of Pragmatics, 41(10), 1924–1937. doi:10.1016/j.pragma.2008.09.017
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Licoppe, C., & Morel, J. (2012). Video-in-interaction: “Talking heads” and the multimodal organization of mobile and Skype video calls. Research in Language and Social Interaction, 45(4), 399–429. doi:10.1080/08351813.2012.724996
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Licoppe, C., & Morel, J. (2014). Mundane video directors: Showing one’s environment in Skype and mobile video calls. In M. Broth, E. Laurier, & L. Mondada (Eds.), Video@work (pp. 135–160). London, England: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Licoppe, C., Rivière, C.-A., & Morel, J. (2015). Grindr casual hookups as interactional achievements. New Media & Society. Advance online publication. doi:10.1177/1461444815589702
   Google Scholar
• Luff, P., Heath, C., Kuzuoka, H., Hindmarsh, J., Yamazaki, K., & Oyama, S. (2003). Fractured ecologies: Creating environments for collaboration. Human Computer Interaction, 18, 51–84. doi:10.1207/S15327051HCI1812_3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Luff, P., Heath, C., Yamashita, N., Kuzuoka, H., & Jirotka, M. (2016 /this issue). Embedded reference: Translocating gestures in video‐mediated interaction. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 49, 342–361. doi:10.1080/08351813.2016.1199088
   Google Scholar
• Lynch, M. (1993). Scientific practice and ordinary action: Ethnomethodology and social studies of science. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Martin, M. (1991). Hello central? Gender, technology and culture in the formation of telephone systems. Montréal, QC: Mc Gill-Queen’s University Press.
   Google Scholar
• McDaniel, S., Olson, G., & Magee, J. (1996). Identifying and analyzing multiple threads in computer-mediated and face-to-face conversations. In M. S. Ackerman (Ed.), Proceedings of the 1996 ACM conference on computer-supported cooperative work (pp. 39–47). New York, NY: ACM.
   Google Scholar
• Mead, G. H. (1967). Mind, self and society. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. ( Original work published 1934)
   Google Scholar
• Meredith, J., & Potter, J. (2013). Conversation analysis and electronic interactions: Methodological, analytic and technical considerations. In H. L. Lim & F. Sudweeks (Eds.), Innovative methods and technologies for electronic discourse analysis (pp. 370–375). Hershey, PA: IGI Global. doi:10.4018/978-1-4666-4426-7.ch017
   Google Scholar
• Mondada, L. (2007). Multimodal resources for turn-taking: Pointing and the emergence of possible next speakers. Discourse Studies, 9(2), 194–225. doi:10.1177/1461445607075346
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mondada, L. (2010). Eröffnung und Vor-Eröffnung in technisch vermittelter interaktion: Videokonferenzen [Opening and pre-opening in technically mediated interaction: Videoconferencing]. In L. Mondada & R. Schmitt (Eds.), Situationeröffnungen: Zur multimodalen Herstellung fokussierter Interaktion (pp. 277–334). Tübingen, Germany: Narr.
   Google Scholar
• Negroponte, N. (1995). Being digital. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Nevile, M., Haddington, P., Heinemann, T., & Rauniomaa, M. (Eds.). (2014). Interacting with objects. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Nilsen, M., & Mäkitalo, A. (2010). Towards a conversational culture? How participants establish strategies for co-ordinating chat postings in the context of in-service training. Discourse Studies, 12(1), 90–105. doi:10.1177/1461445609346774
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Norman, D. (1998). The psychology of everyday things. New York, NY: Basic Books.
   Google Scholar
• Olbertz-Siitonen, M. (2015). Transmission delay in technology-mediated interaction at work. PsychNology Journal, 13(2–3), 203–234.
   Google Scholar
• Pitsch, K., Gehle, R., & Wrede, S. (2013, October). A museum guide robot: Dealing with multiple participants in the real-world. Paper presented at the Workshop “Robots in public spaces: Towards multi-party, short-term, dynamic human-robot interaction” at the second International Conference on Social Robotics (ICSR), Bristol, England.
   Google Scholar
• Plester, B., Wood, C., & Bell, V. (2008). Txt msg n school literacy: Does texting and knowledge of text abbreviations adversely affect children’s literacy attainment? Literacy, 42(3), 137–144. doi:10.1111/read.2008.42.issue-3
   Google Scholar
• Raclaw, J., Robles, J. S., & DiDomenico, S. M. (2016 /this issue). Providing epistemic support for assessments through mobile-supported sharing activities. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 49, 362–379. doi:10.1080/08351813.2016.1199089
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Raudaskoski, S. (2009). Tool and machine: The affordances of the mobile phone. Tampere, Finland: University of Tampere Press.
   Google Scholar
• Relieu, M. (2007). La téléprésence, ou l’autre visiophonie [Telepresence, or other videotelephony]. Réseaux, 144, 183–223. doi:10.3917/res.144.0183
   Google Scholar
• Rintel, S. (2013). Video calling in long-distance relationships: The opportunistic use of audio/video distortions as a relational resource. The Electronic Journal of Communication/La Revue Electronic de Communication, 23(1).
   Google Scholar
• Rossano, F., Brown, P., & Levinson, S. C. (2009). Gaze, questioning and culture. In J. Sidnell (Ed.), Conversation analysis: Comparative perspectives (pp. 187–249). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ruhleder, K., & Jordan, B. (2001). Co-constructing non-mutual realities: Delay-generated trouble in distributed interaction. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW), 10(1), 113–138. doi:10.1023/A:1011243905593
   Google Scholar
• Schegloff, E. A. (1979). Identification and recognition in telephone conversation openings. In G. Psathas (Ed.), Everyday language: Studies in ethnomethodology (pp. 23–78). New York, NY: Irvington.
   Google Scholar
• Schegloff, E. A. (1986). The routine as achievement. Human Studies, 9, 111–151. doi:10.1007/BF00148124
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schegloff, E. A. (1991). Reflections on talk and social structure. In D. Boden & D. Zimmerman (Eds.), Talk and social structure (pp. 44–70). Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
   Google Scholar
• Schegloff, E. A. (1992). In another context. In A. Duranti & C. Goodwin (Eds.), Rethinking context: Language as an interactive phenomenon (pp. 191–227). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Schegloff, E. A. (2002). Beginnings in the telephone. In J. E. Katz & M. Aakhus (Eds.), Perpetual contact: Mobile communication, private talk, public performance (pp. 284–300). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Schönfeldt, J., & Golato, A. (2003). Repair in chats: A conversation analytic approach. Research on Language & Social Interaction, 36(3), 241–284. doi:10.1207/S15327973RLSI3603_02
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schutz, A. (1964). Collected papers II: Studies in social theory (Vol. 2). The Hague, The Netherlands: Martinus Nijhoff.
   Google Scholar
• Sellars, W. (1963). Science, perception, and reality. London, England: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
   Google Scholar
• Sidnell, J., & Stivers, T. (Eds.). (2012). The handbook of conversation analysis (Vol. 121). Malden, MA: John Wiley & Sons.
   Google Scholar
• Spagnolli, A., & Gamberini, L. (2007). Interacting via SMS: Practices of social closeness and reciprocation. British Journal of Social Psychology, 46(2), 343–364. doi:10.1348/014466606X120482
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Spagnolli, A., Scarpetta, F., Tona, T., & Bortolatto, T. (2008). Conversational practices and presence: How the communication structure exploits the affordances of the medium. In A. Spagnolli & L. Gamberini (Eds.), Proceedings of the 11th annual international workshop on presence (pp. 107–116). Padua, Italy: CLEUP.
   Google Scholar
• Sproull, L., & Kiesler, S. (1986). Reducing social context cues: Electronic mail in organizational communication. Management Science, 32(11), 1492–1512. doi:10.1287/mnsc.32.11.1492
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Suchman, L. A. (1987). Plans and situated actions: The problem of human-machine communication. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Thorne, S. L., Hellermann, J., Jones, A., & Lester, D. (2015). Interactional practices and artifact orientation in mobile augmented reality game play. PsychNology Journal, 13(2–3), 259–286.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tudini, V. (2014). Conversation analysis of computer‐mediated interactions. In C. Chapelle (Ed.), The encyclopedia of applied linguistics (pp. 1–7). Chichester, England: Wiley-Blackwell.
   Google Scholar
• Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Weilenmann, A., & Larsson, C. (2002). Local use and sharing of mobile phones. In B. Brown, N. Green, & R. Harper (Eds.), Wireless world: Social and interactional aspects of the mobile age (pp. 92–107). London, England: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Wertsch, J. (1985). Vygotsky and the social formation of mind. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar