Article published in:
Coordination, Collaboration and Cooperation: Interdisciplinary perspectives
Edited by Federica Amici and Lucas M. Bietti
[Interaction Studies 16:3] 2015
► pp. 495525
References

References

Alac, M., & Hutchins, E.
(2004) I see what you are saying: Action as cognition in fMRI brain mapping practice. Journal of Cognition and Culture, 4(3-4), 3–4. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Alibali, M.W., Spencer, R.C., Knox, L., & Kita, S.
(2011) Spontaneous gestures influence strategy choices in problem solving. Psychological Science, 22(9), 1138–1144. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bangerter, A., & Clark, H.H.
(2003) Navigating joint projects with dialogue. Cognitive Science, 27(2), 195–225. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bjørndahl, J.S., Fusaroli, R., Østergaard, S., & Tylén, K.
(2014) Thinking together with material representations: Joint epistemic actions in creative problem solving. Cognitive Semiotics, 7(1), 103–123.Google Scholar
Bottger, P.C. (1984) Expertise and air time as bases of actual and perceived influence in problem-solving groups. Journal of Applied Psychology, 69(2), 214. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Brennan, S.E.
(2000) Processes that shape conversation and their implications for computational linguistics. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 38th annual meeting on association for computational linguistics. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Brennan, S.E., & Schober, M.F.
(2001) How listeners compensate for disfluencies in spontaneous speech. Journal of Memory and Language, 44(2), 274–296. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Brown, P., & Levinson, S.
(1978) Universals in language usage: Politeness phenomena. In E.N. Goody (Ed.), Questions and politeness: Strategies in social interaction (pp. 56–310). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
(1987) Politeness: Some universals in language usage. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Cahn, J.E., & Brennan, S.E.
(1999) A psychological model of grounding and repair in dialog. Paper presented at the Proc. Fall 1999 AAAI Symposium on Psychological Models of Communication in Collaborative Systems .Google Scholar
Clark, H.H.
(1996) Using language. New York: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Clark, H.H., & Brennan, S.E.
(1991) Grounding in communication. In L.B. Resnick, J.M. Levine, & S.D. Teasley (Ed.), Perspectives on socially shared cognition (pp. 127–149). Washington: American Psychological Association. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Clark, H.H., & Schaefer, E.F.
(1989) Contributing to discourse. Cognitive Science, 13, 259–294. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Clark, H.H., & Wilkes-Gibbs, D.
(1986) Referring as a collaborative process. Cognition, 22(1), 1–39. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Curhan, J.R., & Pentland, A.
(2007) Thin slices of negotiation: predicting outcomes from conversational dynamics within the first 5 minutes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(3), 802–811. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Dale, R., Fusaroli, R., Duran, N., & Richardson, D.C.
(2013) The self-organization of human interaction. Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 59, 43–95. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Diehl, M., & Stroebe, W.
(1991) Productivity loss in idea-generating groups: Tracking down the blocking effect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61(3), 392. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Fusaroli, R., Bahrami, B., Olsen, K., Rees, G., Frith, C.D., Roepstorff, A., & Tylén, K.
(2012) Coming to terms: An experimental quantification of the coordinative benefits of linguistic interaction. Psychological Science, 23, 931–939. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Fusaroli, R., Gangopadhyay, N., & Tylén, K.
(2014) The dialogically extended mind: Making a case for language as skilful intersubjective engagement. Cognitive Systems Research, 29–30, 31–39. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Fusaroli, R., Konvalinka, I., & Wallot, S.
(2014) Analyzing social interactions: Promises and challenges of cross recurrence quantification analysis. Springer Proceedings in Mathematics & Statistics, 103, 137–155. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Fusaroli, R., Raczaszek-Leonardi, J., & Tylén, K.
(2014) Dialog as interpersonal synergy. New Ideas in Psychology, 32, 147–157. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Fusaroli, R., & Tylén, K.
in press). Investigating conversational dynamics: Interactive alignment, interpersonal synergy, and collective task performance. Cognitive Science.
Galantucci, B., & Roberts, G.
(2014) Do we notice when communication goes awry? An investigation of people's sensitivity to coherence in spontaneous conversation. PLoS One, 9(7), e103182. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Garrod, S., & Doherty, G. (1994) Conversation, co-ordination and convention: An empirical investigation of how groups establish linguistic conventions. Cognition, 53(3), 181–215. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Garrod, S., & Pickering, M.J.
(2004) Why is conversation so easy? Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 8(1), 8–11. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gauntlett, D.
(2007) Creative explorations: New approaches to identities and audiences. Routledge.Google Scholar
Goffman, E.
(1967) Interaction rituals. Garden City, NY: Aldine Publishing.Google Scholar
Goodwin, C.
(1994) Professional vision. American Anthropologist, 96(3), 606–633. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hargadon, A.B., & Bechky, B.A.
(2006) When collections of creatives become creative collectives: A field study of problem solving at work. Organization Science, 17(4), 484–500. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hutchins, E.
(1995a) Cognition in the wild. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
(1995b) How a cockpit remembers its speeds. Cognitive Science, 19(3), 265–288. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2010) Cognitive ecology. Topics in Cognitive Science, 2(4), 705–715. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kim, T., Chang, A., Holland, L., & Pentland, A.
(2008) Meeting mediator: Enhancing group collaborationusing sociometric feedback. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 2008 ACM conference on Computer supported cooperative work.Google Scholar
Koedinger, K.R., Alibali, M.W., & Nathan, M.J.
(2008) Trade‐Offs between grounded and abstract representations: Evidence from algebra problem Solving. Cognitive Science, 32(2), 366–397. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kurtzberg, T.R., & Amabile, T.M.
(2001) From Guilford to creative synergy: Opening the black box of team-level creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 13(3–4), 285–294. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M.
(1999) Philosophy in the flesh: The embodied mind and its challenge to western thought. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Marsh, K.L., Richardson, M.J., & Schmidt, R.C.
(2009) Social connection through joint action and interpersonal coordination. Topics in Cognitive Science, 1, 320–339. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Michael, J., Bogart, K., Tylén, K., Krueger, J., Bech, M., Rosendahl Østergaard, J., & Fusaroli, R.
2015). Compensatory strategies enhance rapport in interactions involving people with Möbius syndrome.
Mills, G.
(2011) The emergence of procedural conventions in dialogue. In L. Carlson, C. Hölscher, & T. Shipley (Eds.), Proceedings of the 33rd Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society. Boston, USA: Cognitive Science Society.Google Scholar
(2014) Dialogue in joint activity: Complementarity, convergence and conventionalization. New Ideas in Psychology, 32, 158–173. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Mills, G., & Healey, P.G.T.
(2008) Semantic negotiation in dialogue: The mechanisms of alignment. Proceedings of the 9th SIGdial Workshop on Discourse and Dialogue. Columbus, OH: Association for Computational Linguistics. Crossref
Nijstad, B.A., & De Dreu, C.K.
(2002) Creativity and group innovation. Applied Psychology, 51(3), 400–406. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Pauhus, P.B., Dzindolet, M.T., Poletes, G., & Camacho, L.M.
(1993) Perception of performance in group brainstorming: The illusion of group productivity. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 19(1), 78–89. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Pickering, M.J., & Garrod, S. (2004) Toward a mechanistic psychology of dialogue. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 27, 169–190. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Reich, C.M., Berman, J.S., Dale, R., & Levitt, H.M.
(2014) Vocal synchrony in psychotherapy. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 33, 481–494. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Rietzschel, E.F., Nijstad, B.A., & Stroebe, W.
(2006) Productivity is not enough: A comparison of interactive and nominal brainstorming groups on idea generation and selection. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 42(2), 244–251. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Roschelle, J., & Teasley, S.D.
(1995) The construction of shared knowledge in collaborative problem solving. Paper presented at the Computer supported collaborative learning. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Sacks, H., Schegloff, E.A., & Jefferson, G.
(1974) A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation. Language, 696–735. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Saget, S., & Guyomard, M.
(2006) Goal-oriented dialog as a collaborative subordinated activity involving collective acceptance. Brandial’06, 131.
Schegloff, E.A.
(1987) Analyzing single episodes of interaction: An exercise in conversation analysis. Social Psychology Quarterly, 101–114. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Schegloff, E.A., Jefferson, G., & Sacks, H.
(1977) The preference for self-correction in the organization of repair in conversation. Language, 361–382. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Schwartz, D.L.
(1995) The emergence of abstract representations in dyad problem solving. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 4(3), 321–354. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Sutton, R.I., & Hargadon, A.
(1996) Brainstorming groups in context: Effectiveness in a product design firm. Administrative Science Quarterly, 685–718. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Szary, J., & Dale, R.
(2013) Dyadic cooperation enhances retrieval and recall of crossword solutions. Proceedings of the 35th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society , 3492–3497.
Themistocleous, M., McCabe, R., Rees, N., Hassan, I., Healey, P., & Priebe, S.
(2009) Establishing mutual understanding in interaction: An analysis of conversational repair in psychiatric consultations. Communication & Medicine, 6(2), 165–176.Google Scholar
Traum, D.R.
(1999) Computational models of grounding in collaborative systems. Paper presented at the Psychological Models of Communication in Collaborative Systems-Papers from the AAAI Fall Symposium.Google Scholar
Tylén, K., Fusaroli, R., Bjørndahl, J.S., Rączaszek-Leonardi, J., Østergaard, S., & Stjernfelt, F.
(2015) Diagrammatic reasoning: Abstraction, interaction, and insight. Pragmatics and Cognition, 22(2), 263–281. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Tylén, K., & McGraw, J.
(2014) Materializing mind: The role of objects in cognition and culture. In M. Gallotti & J. Michael (Eds.), Perspectives on social ontology and social cognition. Springer. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 4 other publications

Gangopadhyay, Nivedita & Alois Pichler
2021. Texts: A Case Study of Joint Action. SATS 0:0 Crossref logo
McCabe, Rose & Patrick G. T. Healey
2018. Miscommunication in Doctor-Patient Communication. Topics in Cognitive Science 10:2  pp. 409 ff. Crossref logo
Roche, Jennifer M., Arkady Zgonnikov & Laura M. Morett
2021. Cognitive Processing of Miscommunication in Interactive Listening: An Evaluation of Listener Indecision and Cognitive Effort. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research 64:1  pp. 159 ff. Crossref logo
Ross, Wendy, Frédéric Vallée-Tourangeau & Vlad Glăveanu
2020.  In Encyclopedia of Creativity,  pp. 161 ff. Crossref logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 14 september 2021. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.