“You’re putting words in my mouth!”: Interaction as mutual ventriloquation

References

• Aakhus, M. (2003). Neither naïve nor critical reconstruction: Dispute mediators, impasse, and the design of argumentation. Argumentation, 17(3), 265–290. doi:10.1023/A:1025112227381
   Google Scholar
• Aggerholm, H. K., Asmuß, B., Boivin, G., Buttny, R., & Krippendorff, K. (2019). How institutional authority and routine exertions of power can be mobilized, negotiated, and challenged. In N. Bencherki, F. Matte, & F. Cooren (Eds.), Authority and power in social interaction: Methods and analysis (pp. 56–76). New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Baillargeon, D. (2018). Connecting strategic practices, regionality and institution: A ventriloquism perspective on creativity in agencies. M@n@gement, 21(2), 913–943. doi:10.3917/mana.212.0913
   Google Scholar
• Bartesaghi, M. (2014). Ventriloquism as a matter for discourse analysis. Language Under Discussion, 2(1), 50–57. doi:10.31885/lud.2.1.244
   Google Scholar
• Bencherki, N. (2016). How things make things do things with words, or how to pay attention to what things have to say. Communication Research and Practice, 2(3), 272–289. doi:10.1080/22041451.2016.1214888
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bencherki, N., Matte, F., & Cooren, F. (Eds.). (2019). Authority and power in social interaction: Methods and analysis. New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Benoit-Barné, C., & Cooren, F. (2009). The accomplishment of authority through presentification: How authority is distributed among and negotiated by organizational members. Management Communication Quarterly, 23(1), 5–31. doi:10.1177/0893318909335414
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bercovitch, J. (1999). Mediation and negotiation technique. In L. Kurtz Ed., The encyclopedia of violence, peace and conflict (Vol. 2, pp. 403–412). Cambridge, MA: Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bergeron, C. D., & Cooren, F. (2012). The collective framing of crisis management: A ventriloqual analysis of emergency operations centres. Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management, 20(3), 120–137. doi:10.1111/j.1468-5973.2012.00671.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bourdieu, P., & Robinson, K. (1985). Delegation and political fetishism. Thesis Eleven, 10-11(1), 56–70. doi:10.1177/072551368501000105
   Google Scholar
• Brummans, B. H. J. M., Higham, L., & Cooren, F. (2022). The work of conflict mediation: Actors, vectors, and communicative relationality. Human Relations, 75(4), 764–791. doi:10.1177/0018726721994180
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cappella, J. N. (1990). The method of proof by example in interaction analysis. Communication Monographs, 57(3), 236–242. doi:10.1080/03637759009376199
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Caronia, L., & Cooren, F. (2014). Decentering our analytical position: The dialogicity of things. Discourse & Communication, 8(1), 41–61. doi:10.1177/1750481313503226
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Castor, T., & Bartesaghi, M. (2016). Metacommunication during disaster response: “Reporting” and the constitution of problems in Hurricane Katrina teleconferences. Management Communication Quarterly, 30(4), 472–502. doi:10.1177/0893318916646454
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Christensen, E., & Christensen, L. T. (2022). The interpellated voice: The social discipline of member communication. Management Communication Quarterly, 36(3), 496–519. doi:10.1177/08933189211068790
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clifton, J., Fachin, F., & Cooren, F. (2021). How artefacts do leadership: A ventriloquial analysis. Management Communication Quarterly, 35(2), 256–280. doi:10.1177/0893318921998078
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• CNN. (2020, September 9). “I’m not going to let you do this”: CNN anchor spars with senator over Trump audio. CNN. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=P9E-dGkE-jI
   Google Scholar
• Cooren, F. (2010). Action and agency in dialogue: Passion, incarnation, and ventriloquism. Amsterdam, the Netherlands: John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Cooren, F. (2012). Communication theory at the center: Ventriloquism and the communicative constitution of reality. The Journal of Communication, 62(1), 1–20. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2011.01622.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cooren, F. (2014). Pragmatism as ventriloquism: Creating a dialogue among seven traditions in the study of communication. Language Under Discussion, 2(1), 1–26. doi:10.31885/lud.2.1.239
   Google Scholar
• Cooren, F. (2015a). In medias res: Communication, existence, and materiality. Communication Research and Practice, 1(4), 307–321. doi:10.1080/22041451.2015.1110075
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cooren, F. (2015b). In the name of the law: Ventriloquism and juridical matters. In K. McGee (Ed.), Latour and the passage of law (pp. 235–272). Edinburgh, UK: Edinburgh University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Cooren, F. (2016). Ethics for dummies: Ventriloquism and responsibility. Atlantic Journal of Communication, 24(1), 17–30. doi:10.1080/15456870.2016.1113963
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cooren, F. (2017). Ventriloquism in and as a dialogue with German scholars: Habermas, Honneth, and Günther. In S. Blaschke & D. Schoeneborn (Eds.), Organization as communication: Perspectives in dialogue (pp. 69–76). New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Cooren, F. (2018). Acting for, with, and through: A relational perspective on agency in MSF’s organizing. In B. H. J. M. Brummans The agency of organizing: Perspectives and case studies (pp. 142–169). New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Cooren, F. (2020). Reconciling dialogue and propagation: A ventriloquial inquiry. Language and Dialogue, 10(1), 9–28. doi:10.1075/ld.00057.coo
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cooren, F., Higham, L., & Brummans, B. H. J. M. (2021). Epilogue: the ventriloquism of media. Communication as delegation and tele-action. In J. Baron, J. Fleeger, & S. W. Lerner (Eds.), Media ventriloquism: How audiovisual technologies transform the voice-body relationship (pp. 241–260). New York: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Cooren, F., Higham, L., & Huët, R. (2017). Analyzing online suicide prevention chats: A communicative constitutive approach. Language and Dialogue, 7(1), 3–25. doi:10.1075/ld.7.1.02coo
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cooren, F., & Sandler, S. (2014). Polyphony, ventriloquism, and constitution: In dialogue with Bakhtin. Communication Theory, 24(3), 225–244. doi:10.1111/comt.12041
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Costantini, R. A., & Wolfe, A. W. (2022). Authorial incongruity and organizational presence(s): A ventriloquial analysis of shadowed organization. Management Communication Quarterly, 36(4), 612–636. doi:10.1177/08933189221076853
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Craig, R. T. (1999). Communication theory as a field. Communication Theory, 9(2), 119–161. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2885.1999.tb00355.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Day, A. (2018). Throwing our voices: Ventriloquism as new media activism. Media, Culture & Society, 40(4), 617–628. doi:10.1177/0163443718756064
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Denault, V., & Cooren, F. (2018). Lawyers as ventriloquists: A contemporary approach to understanding credibility in the courtroom. In G. Tessuto, V. K. Bhatia, & J. Engberg (Eds.), Frameworks for discursive actions and practices of the law (pp. 138–152). Newcastle upon Tyne, UK: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Fauré, B., Cooren, F., & Matte, F. (2019). To speak or not to speak the language of numbers: Accounting as ventriloquism. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability, 32(1), 337–361. doi:10.1108/AAAJ-07-2017-3013
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Follett, M. P. (1926). The giving of orders. Scientific Foundations of Business Administration, 29–37.
   Google Scholar
• Forbes, S. (2015). Measuring disability: The agency of attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder diagnostic questionnaire. Discourse Studies, 17(1), 25–40. doi:10.1177/1461445614557759
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Glenn, P. (2010). A mediator’s dilemma: Acknowledging or disregarding stance displays. Negotiation Journal, 26(2), 155–162. doi:10.1111/j.1571-9979.2010.00263.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goffman, E. (1967). Interaction ritual: Essays in face-to-face behavior. Chicago, IL: Aldine.
   Google Scholar
• Goldblatt, D. (2006). Art and ventriloquism: Critical voices in art, theory and culture. New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Greco Morasso, S. (2007). The covert argumentativity of mediation: Developing argumentation through asking questions. In F. H. van Eemeren, J. A. Blair, C. H. Willard, & B. Garssen (Eds.), Proceedings of the Sixth Conference of the International Society for the Study of Argumentation (pp. 513–520). Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
   Google Scholar
• Greco Morasso, S. (2011). Argumentation in dispute mediation: A reasonable way to handle conflict. Amsterdam, the Netherlands: John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Harrington, C. B., & Merry, S. E. (1988). Ideological production: The making of community mediation. Law & Society Review, 22(4), 709–736. doi:10.2307/3053707
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hayashi, M., Raymond, G., & Sidnell, J. (Eds.). (2013). Conversational repair and human understanding. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Heisterkamp, B. L. (2006). Conversational displays of mediator neutrality in a court-based program. Journal of Pragmatics, 38(12), 2051–2064. doi:10.1016/j.pragma.2006.03.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heritage, J. (1984). Garfinkel and ethnomethodology. Cambridge, UK: Polity.
   Google Scholar
• Higham, L. (2018). Proposal for a typology of listening markers and listening request markers. In R. C. Arnett & F. Cooren (Eds.), Dialogic ethics (pp. 45–76). Amsterdam, the Netherlands: John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Honneth, A. (1996). The struggle for recognition: The moral grammar of social conflicts. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hudson, N. (2016). Communication and power in the job interview: Using a ventriloqual approach to analyze moral accounts. Text & Talk, 36(3), 319–340. doi:10.1515/text-2016-0015
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jacobs, S. (1990). On the especially nice fit between qualitative analysis and the known properties of conversation. Communication Monographs, 57(3), 243–249. doi:10.1080/03637759009376200
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jacobs, S. (2002). Maintaining neutrality in dispute mediation: Managing disagreement while managing not to disagree. Journal of Pragmatics, 34(10–11), 1403–1426. doi:10.1016/S0378-2166(02)00071-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jacobs, S., & Aakhus, M. (2002). What mediators do with words: Implementing three models of rational discussion in dispute mediation. Conflict Resolution Quarterly, 20(2), 177–203. doi:10.1002/crq.3890200205
   Google Scholar
• Jahn, J. L. S. (2016). Adapting safety rules in a high reliability context: How wildland firefighting workgroups ventriloquize safety rules to understand hazards. Management Communication Quarterly, 30(3), 362–389. doi:10.1177/0893318915623638
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jefferson, G. (1984). On stepwise transition from talk about a trouble to inappropriately next-positioned matters. In J. M. Atkinson & J. Heritage (Eds.), Structures of social action: Studies of conversation analysis (pp. 191–222). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Johnson, K. R., Holdaway, E., & Saunders Ross, A. (2021). “We are children of God”: White Christian teachers discussing race. Linguistics and Education, 64, 1–13. doi:10.1016/j.linged.2021.100936
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jones, T. S., & Bodtker, A. (2001). Mediating with heart in mind: Addressing emotion in mediation practice. Negotiation Journal, 17(3), 207–244. doi:10.1111/j.1571-9979.2001.tb00238.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kessler, S. (2021). You’re the puppet”: Presidential ventriloquism, vocal technologies, and the politics of voice. In J. Baron, J. Fleeger, & S. W. Lerner (Eds.), Media ventriloquism: How audiovisual technologies transform the voice-body relationship (pp. 215–237). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kobin, B. (2019, August23). Court rejects Kentucky’s attempt to shirk legal fees in Kim Davis gay marriage case. USA Today. Retrieved from https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2019/08/23/kim-davis-same-sex-marriage-suit-court-rules-kentucky-must-pay-fees/2101785001/
   Google Scholar
• Kolb, D. M. (1985). To be a mediator: Expressive tactics in mediation. The Journal of Social Issues, 41(2), 11–26. doi:10.1111/j.1540-4560.1985.tb00852.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kressel, K., Henderson, T., Reich, W., & Cohen, C. (2012). Multidimensional analysis of conflict mediator style. Conflict Resolution Quarterly, 30(2), 135–171. doi:10.1002/crq.21061
   Google Scholar
• Kuhn, T., Ashcraft, K. L., & Cooren, F. (2017). The work of communication: Relational perspectives on working and organizing in contemporary capitalism. New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Latour, B. (2005). Reassembling the social: An introduction to actor-network theory. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Latour, B. (2010a). Foreword—who is making the dummy speak? In F. Cooren, Action and agency in dialogue: Passion, incarnation and ventriloquism (pp. 13–14). John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Latour, B. (2010b). The making of law: An ethnography of the Conseil d’état. Cambridge, UK: Polity.
   Google Scholar
• Long, Z. (2016). A feminist ventriloquial analysis of hao gongzuo (“good work”): Politicizing Chinese post-1980s women’s meanings of work. Women’s Studies in Communication, 39(4), 422–441. doi:10.1080/07491409.2016.1224991
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Long, Z., Selzer King, A., & Buzzanell, P. M. (2018). Ventriloqual voicings of parenthood in graduate school: An intersectionality analysis of work-life negotiations. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 46(2), 223–242. doi:10.1080/00909882.2018.1435901
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McGee, K. (Ed.). (2015). Latour and the passage of law. Edinburgh, UK: Edinburgh University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Messerli, T. C. (2017). Sitcom humour as ventriloquism. Lingua, 197, 16–33. doi:10.1016/j.lingua.2017.05.006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Messerli, T. C. (2020). Subtitled artefacts as communication – the case of Ocean’s Eleven scene 12. Perspectives: Studies in Translation Theory and Practice, 28(6), 851–863. doi:10.1080/0907676X.2019.1704805
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mitra, R. (2016). Reconstituting “America”: The clean energy economy ventriloquized. Environmental Communication, 10(2), 269–288. doi:10.1080/17524032.2015.1047885
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nathues, E., van Vuuren, M., & Cooren, F. (2021). Speaking about vision, talking in the name of so much more: A methodological framework for ventriloquial analyses in organization studies. Organization Studies, 42(9), 1457–1476. doi:10.1177/0170840620934063
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pen. (2021, June11). In Wikipedia. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pen
   Google Scholar
• Peters, J. D. (1999). Speaking into the air: A history of the idea of communication. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Peters, J. D. (2015). The marvelous clouds: Toward a philosophy of elemental media. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Poitras, J. (2013). The strategic use of caucus to facilitate parties’ trust in mediators. International Journal of Conflict Management, 24(1), 23–39. doi:10.1108/10444061311296116
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Putnam, L. L. (1989). Bargaining. In E. Barnouw (Ed.), International encyclopedia of communications (Vol. 1, pp. 176–178). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Russill, C. (2014). Planetary pragmatism? A response to François Cooren. Language Under Discussion, 2(1), 27–34. doi:10.31885/lud.2.1.240
   Google Scholar
• Sacks, H., Schegloff, E. A., & Jefferson, G. (1974). A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation. Language, 50(4), 696–735. doi:10.1353/lan.1974.0010
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schegloff, E. A. (1991). Conversation analysis and socially shared cognition. In L. B. Resnick, J. L. Levine, & S. D. Teasley (Eds.), Perspectives on Socially Shared Cognition (pp. 150–171). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
   Google Scholar
• Sidnell, J. (2013). Basic conversation analytic methods. In J. Sidnell & T. Stivers (Eds.), The handbook of conversation analysis (pp. 77–99). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Blackwell.
   Google Scholar
• Simpson, A., & Dervin, F. (2017). “Speaking from the stomach?” Ventriloquised ethnocentrisms about Finnish education. Educational Practice and Theory, 39(1), 5–29. doi:10.7459/ept/39.1.02
   Google Scholar
• Spivak, G. C. (1999). A critique of postcolonial reason: Toward a history of the vanishing present. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Taylor, J. R., & Van Every, E. J. (2014). When organization fails: Why authority matters. New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• van Burgsteden, L., Te Molder, H., & Raymond, G. (2022). The turn-by-turn unfolding of “dialogue”: Examining participants’ orientations to moments of transformative engagement. Language & Communication, 82, 64–81. doi:10.1016/j.langcom.2021.11.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vasilyeva, A. L., Robles, J. S., Saludadez, J. A., Schwägerl, C., & Castor, T. (2020). The varieties of (more or less) formal authority. In N. Bencherki, F. Matte, & F. Cooren (Eds.), Authority and power in social interaction: Methods and analysis (pp. 37–55). New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Vásquez, C., Schoeneborn, D., & Sergi, V. (2015). Summoning the spirits: Organizational texts and the (dis)ordering properties of communication. Human Relations, 69(3), 629–659. doi:10.1177/0018726715589422
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weigand, E. (2006). Argumentation: The mixed game. Argumentation, 20(1), 59–87. doi:10.1007/s10503-006-9000-4
   Google Scholar
• Wilhoit, E. D., & Kisselburgh, L. G. (2019). The relational ontology of resistance: Hybridity, ventriloquism, and materiality in the production of bike commuting as resistance. Organization, 26(6), 873–893. doi:10.1177/1350508417723719
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Windsor, W. L. (2004). An ecological approach to semiotics. Journal for the Theory of Social Behavior, 34(2), 179–198. doi:10.1111/j.0021-8308.2004.00242.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Winslade, J., Monk, G., & Cotter, A. (1998). A narrative approach to the practice of mediation. Negotiation Journal, 14(1), 21–41. doi:10.1111/j.1571-9979.1998.tb00146.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar