Paradoxical Invitations: Challenges in Soliciting More Information from Child Witnesses

References

• Antaki, C. (2002). “Lovely”: Turn-initial high-grade assessments in telephone closings. Discourse Studies, 4(1), 5–23. doi:10.1177/14614456020040010101
   Google Scholar
• Antaki, C., Houtkoop-Steenstra, H., & Rapley, M. (2000). “Brilliant. Next question…”: High-grade assessment sequences in the completion of interactional units. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 33(3), 235–262. doi:10.1207/S15327973RLSI3303_1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Antaki, C., Richardson, E., Stokoe, E., & Willott, S. (2015). Dealing with the distress of people with intellectual disabilities reporting sexual assault and rape. Discourse Studies, 17(4), 415–432. doi:10.1177/1461445615578962
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Back, C. (2012). The legal process in child sexual abuse: Difficulties in confirming evidence and providing support ( Doctoral dissertation, Linköping University Electronic Press).
   Google Scholar
• Back, C., Gustafsson, P. A., Larsson, I., & Berterö, C. (2011). Managing the legal proceedings: An interpretative phenomenological analysis of sexually abused children’s experience with the legal process. Child Abuse & Neglect, 35(1), 50–57. doi:10.1016/j.chiabu.2010.08.004
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beach, W. A. (1993). Transitional regularities for ‘casual’ “Okay” usages. Journal of Pragmatics, 19(4), 325–352. doi:10.1016/0378-2166(93)90092-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berg, M. (1996). Practices of reading and writing: The constitutive role of the patient record in medical work. Sociology of Health & Illness, 18(4), 499–524. doi:10.1111/shil.1996.18.issue-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brouwer, C. E. (2003). Word searches in NNS–NS interaction: Opportunities for language learning? The Modern Language Journal, 87(4), 534–545. doi:10.1111/modl.2003.87.issue-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Butler, C. W., Potter, J., Danby, S., Emmison, M., & Hepburn, A. (2010). Advice-implicative interrogatives: Building “client-centered” support in a children’s helpline. Social Psychology Quarterly, 73(3), 265–287. doi:10.1177/0190272510379838
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Button, G. (1987). Moving out of closings. In G. Button & J. R. E. Lee (Eds.), Talk and social organisation (pp. 101–151). Clevedon, England: Multilingual Matters.
   Google Scholar
• Childs, C., & Walsh, D. (2017). Self-disclosure and self-deprecating self-reference: Conversational practices of personalization in police interviews with children reporting alleged sexual offenses. Journal of Pragmatics, 121, 188–201. doi:10.1016/j.pragma.2017.10.013
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clifton, J. (2012). Conversation analysis in dialogue with stocks of interactional knowledge: Facework and appraisal interviews. The Journal of Business Communication, 49(4), 283–311. doi:10.1177/0021943612436974
   Google Scholar
• College of Policing. (2013, October 23). Investigative interviewing. Retrieved from https://www.app.college.police.uk/app-content/investigations/investigative-interviewing/
   Google Scholar
• Craven, A., & Potter, J. (2010). Directives: Entitlement and contingency in action. Discourse Studies, 12(4), 419–442. doi:10.1177/1461445610370126
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Deppermann, A., Schmitt, R., & Mondada, L. (2010). Agenda and emergence: Contingent and planned activities in a meeting. Journal of Pragmatics, 42(6), 1700–1718. doi:10.1016/j.pragma.2009.10.006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heinemann, T. (2006). ‘Will you or can’t you?’: Displaying entitlement in interrogative requests. Journal of Pragmatics, 38(7), 1081–1104. doi:10.1016/j.pragma.2005.09.013
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hepburn, A., & Bolden, G. B. (2017). Transcribing for social research. London, England: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Heritage, J. (2002). The limits of questioning: Negative interrogatives and hostile question content. Journal of Pragmatics, 34(10–11), 1427–1446. doi:10.1016/S0378-2166(02)00072-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heritage, J. (2011). The interaction order and clinical practice: Some observations on dysfunctions and action steps. Patient Education and Counseling, 84(3), 338–343. doi:10.1016/j.pec.2011.05.022
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heritage, J., Robinson, J. D., Elliott, M. N., Beckett, M., & Wilkes, M. (2007). Reducing patients’ unmet concerns in primary care: The difference one word can make. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 22(10), 1429–1433. doi:10.1007/s11606-007-0279-0
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Komter, M. L. (2006). From talk to text: The interactional construction of a police record. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 39(3), 201–228. doi:10.1207/s15327973rlsi3903_2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lerner, G. H. (1993). Collectivities in action: Establishing the relevance of conjoined participation in conversation. Text-Interdisciplinary Journal for the Study of Discourse, 13(2), 213–246. doi:10.1515/text.1.1993.13.2.213
   Google Scholar
• Mikkola, P., & Lehtinen, E. (2014). Initiating activity shifts through use of appraisal forms as material objects during performance appraisal interviews. In M. Nevile, P. Haddington, T. Heinemann, & M. Rauniomaa (Eds.), Interacting with objects: Language, materiality, and social activity (pp. 57–78). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
   Google Scholar
• Mondada, L. (2006). Participants’ online analysis and multimodal practices: Projecting the end of the turn and the closing of the sequence. Discourse Studies, 8(1), 117–129. doi:10.1177/1461445606059561
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Odeljan, R., Butorac, K., & Bailey, A. (2015). Investigative interviews with children. European Police Science and Research Bulletin, 12, 18–24.
   Google Scholar
• Park, Y. (2013). Negotiating last-minute concerns in closing Korean medical encounters: The use of gaze, body and talk. Social Science & Medicine, 97, 176–191. doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2013.08.027
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peräkylä, A., & Vehviläinen, S. (2003). Conversation analysis and the professional stocks of interactional knowledge. Discourse & Society, 14(6), 727–750. doi:10.1177/09579265030146003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pomerantz, A. (1984). Agreeing and disagreeing with assessments: Some features of preferred/dispreferred turn shapes. In J. M. Atkinson (Ed.), Structures of social action: Studies in conversation analysis (pp. 57–101). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Robinson, J. D. (2001). Closing medical encounters: Two physician practices and their implications for the expression of patients’ unstated concerns. Social Science & Medicine, 53(5), 639–656. doi:10.1016/S0277-9536(00)00366-X
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Robinson, J. D., & Stivers, T. (2001). Achieving activity transitions in physician-patient encounters: From history taking to physical examination. Human Communication Research, 27(2), 253–298.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ruusuvuori, J. (2000). Control in medical interaction: Practices of giving and receiving the reason for the visit in primary health care ( Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Tampere, Tampere, Findland.
   Google Scholar
• Schegloff, E. A. (1996). Turn organization: One intersection of grammar and interaction. In E. Ochs, E. Schegloff, & S. A. Thompson (Eds.), Interaction and grammar: Studies in interactional sociolinguistics: 13 (pp. 52–133). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Schegloff, E. A. (2007). Sequence organization in interaction: Volume 1: A primer in conversation analysis (Vol. 1). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Schegloff, E. A., & Sacks, H. (1973). Opening up closings. Semiotica, 8(4), 289–327. doi:10.1515/semi.1973.8.4.289
   Google Scholar
• Stommel, W., & Te Molder, H. (2015). When technological affordances meet interactional norms. PsychNology Journal, 13(2–3), 235–258.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• UK Ministry of Justice. (2011). Achieving best evidence in criminal proceedings. Retrieved from http://www.justice.gov.uk/downloads/victims-and-witnesses/vulnerable-witnesses/achieving-best-evidence-criminal-proceedings.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Waring, H. Z. (2012). “Any questions?”: Investigating the nature of understanding‐checks in the language classroom. Tesol Quarterly, 46(4), 722–752.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weatherall, A. (2011). I don’t know as a prepositioned epistemic hedge. Research on Language & Social Interaction, 44(4), 317–337. doi:10.1080/08351813.2011.619310
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Westera, N. J., Kebbell, M. R., & Milne, B. (2016). Want a better criminal justice response to rape? Improve police interviews with complainants and suspects. Violence Against Women, 22(14), 1748–1769. doi:10.1177/1077801216631439
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yaqubi, B., & Karimpour, S. (2014). A conversation analytic study on the teachers’ management of understanding-check question sequences in EFL classrooms. Journal of English Language Teaching and Learning, 5(12), 109–134.
   Google Scholar