Cover not available
Article published In:
Pragmatics
Vol. 34:3 (2024) ► pp.393–421

Dealing with missing participants in the opening phases of a videoconference

ORCID logo | University of Palermo
ORCID logo | University of Trento
The paper explores the social interaction that takes place during the initial phases of videoconferences. The focus is on the problem of absent participants, which is often considered a reason for delaying the official beginning of the meeting. One of the resources that the participants have is to reach the absent participant by cellphone. We observed a recurrent pattern of action whereby one of the participants disengages from the video meeting to reach the missing person by phone. This negotiation process moves through four steps: (1) the detection of the problem, (2) the offer to call the missing person by one participant, (3) the acceptance of this offer by the moderator, and (4) the temporary absence of the participant from the video meeting to make the phone call. Our data concern videoconferencing in the context of international teacher training in German as a foreign language (LEELU project, https://​www​.leelu​.eu​/english/).
Keywords: video-mediated communication, openings, use of smartphone during videoconferencing, entering in and exiting from a video meeting
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Literature review
  • 3.Data collection and design
  • 4.How to disengage from the meeting to call a missing participant
    • 4.1Offering to call the missing participant
    • 4.2Offering to call the missing participant, 2
    • 4.3Dealing with an incoming call during the meeting
  • 5.How to re-engage in the meeting
    • 5.1Re-entering the meeting
    • 5.2Re-entering the meeting, 2
    • 5.3Coming back to the meeting with a report (of the call)
  • 6.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 16 May 2023
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/prag.20035.hof
References (64)
References
Aoki, Paul M., Margaret H. Szymanski, and Allison Woodruff. 2006. “Media Spaces in the Mobile World.” CSCW: 1–5.Google Scholar
Arminen, Ilkka, and Minna Leinonen. 2006. “Mobile Phone Call Openings: Tailoring Answers to Personalized Summonses.” Discourse Studies 8 (3): 339–368. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Arminen, Ilkka, Christian Licoppe, and Anna Spagnolli. 2016. “Respecifying Mediated Interaction.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 49 (4): 290–309. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Asmuß, Birte. 2002. Strukturelle Dissensmarkierungen in interkultureller Kommunikation. Analysen deutsch-dänischer Verhandlungen [Structural markers of disagreement in intercultural communication. Analysis of German-Danish business meetings]. Tübingen, Germany: Niemeyer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Asmuß, Brite. 2015. “Multimodal Perspectives on Meeting Interaction.” In The Cambridge Handbook of Meeting Science, ed. by Joseph A. Allen, Nale Lehmann-Willenbrock, and Steven G. Rogelberg, 277–304. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Asmuß, Birte, and Jan Svennevig. 2009. “Meeting Talk: An Introduction.” Journal of Business Communication 46 (1): 3–22. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Asmuß, Birte. 2007. “What Do People Expect from Public Services? Requests in Public Service Encounters.” Hermes – Journal of Language and Communication Studies 381: 66–83.Google Scholar
Atkinson, Mick A., Edward C. Cuff, and John R. E. Lee. 1978. “The Recommencement of a Meeting as a Member’s Accomplishment.” In Studies in the Organization of Conversational Interaction, ed. by Jim Schenkein, 133–153. New York: Academic Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Beers Fägersten, Kristy, Elin Holmsten, and Una Cunningham. 2010. “Multimodal Communication and Meta-Modal Discourse.” In Handbook of Research on Discourse Behavior and Digital Communication: Language Structures and Social Interaction, ed. by Rotimi Taiwo, 145–163. Hershey PA: Information Science Publishing. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Boden, Deirdre. 1994. The Business of Talk. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Bruxelles, Sylvie, Luca Greco, and Lorenza Mondada. 2009. “Pratiques de transition: ressources multimodales pour la structuration de l’activité.” In Méthodologies d’analyse de situations coopératives de conception: corpus MOSAIC, ed. by Françoise Détienne, and Véroniche Traverso, 221–301. Nancy: Presses universitaires de Nancy.Google Scholar
Caspi, Aviv. 2020. “Punctuality and Coordination Failures in the Remote Workplace.” Available at SSRN: [URL] or DOI logo
Craven, Alexandra, and Jonathan Potter. 2010. “Directives: Entitlement and Contingency in Action.” Discourse Studies 12 (4): 419–442. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dawidowicz, Marta, Karen Schramm, Roberta Abbate, Doris Abitzsch, Ilona Feld-Knapp, Katrin Hofmann, Sabine Hoffmann, Gabriella Perge, and Ewout van der Knaap. 2019. “Erfahrungsbasiertheit, kollegiale Kooperation und videobasierte Reflexion als Prinzipien des LEELULehrerInnenbildungsprojekts.” [URL]
Deppermann, Arnulf, Reinhold Schmitt, and Lorenza Mondada. 2010. “Agenda and Emergence: Contingent and Planned Activities in a Meeting.” Journal of Pragmatics 42 (6): 1700–1718. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Drew, Paul, and Kobin H. Kendrick. 2018. “Searching for Trouble: Recruiting Assistance through Embodied Action.” Social Interaction. Video-Based Studies of Human Sociality 1 (1). DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Due, Brian L., and Christian Licoppe. 2020. “Video-Mediated Interaction (VMI): Introduction to a Special Issue on the Multimodal Accomplishment of VMI Institutional Activities.” Social Interaction. Video-Based Studies in Human Sociality 3 (3): 1–20.Google Scholar
. 2021. “Video-Mediated Interaction (VMI).” Social Interaction. Video-Based Studies of Human Sociality 3 (3). DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Egbert, Maria. 1997. “Schisming: The Collaborative Transformation from a Single Conversation to Multiple Conversations.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 30 (1): 1–51. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
González-Martínez, Esther, and Marcelo Giglio. 2020. “Introduire les points soumis à discussion lors d’une réunion. Une analyse conversationnelle longitudinale.” Travaux Neuchâtelois de Linguistique 721: 31–61. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goffman, Erving. 1963. Behavior in Public Places. New York, The Free Press of Glencoe.Google Scholar
Harper, Richard, Rod Watson, and Christian Licoppe. 2017. “Interpersonal Video Communication as a Site of Human Sociality. A Special Issue of Pragmatics.” Pragmatics 27 (3): 319–350.Google Scholar
Heritage, John. 1984. “A Change-of-State Token and Aspects of its Sequential Placemen.” In Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis, ed. by J. Maxwell Atkinson, and John Heritage, 299–345, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
House, Juliane, and Gabriele Kasper. 1981. “Politeness Markers in English and German.” In Conversational Routine. Explorations in Standardized Communication Situations and Prepatterned Speech, ed. by Florian Coulmas, Vol. 21, 157–185. The Hague, Paris, New York: Mouton Publishers. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ilomäki, Sakari, and Johanna Ruusuvuori. 2020. “From Appearings to Disengagements: Openings and Closings in Video-Mediated Tele-Homecare Encounters.” Social Interaction. Video-Based Studies of Human Sociality 3 (3). DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Keisanen, Tiina., Mirka Rauniomaa, and Pentti Haddington. 2014. “Suspending Action.” In Multiactivity in Social Interaction: Beyond Multitasking, ed. by Pentti Haddington, Tiina Keisanen, Lorenza Mondada, and Maurice Nevile, 109–33. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kendrick, Kobin H. 2021. “The ‘Other’ Side of Recruitment: Methods of Assistance in Social Interaction.” Journal of Pragmatics 1781: 68–82. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kendrick, Kobin H., and Paul Drew. 2014. “The Putative Preference for Offers over Requests.” In Requesting in Social Interaction, ed. by Paul Drew, and Elizabeth Couper-Kuhlen, 87–114. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2016. “Recruitment: Offers, Requests, and the Organization of Assistance in Interaction.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 49 (1): 1–19. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lehmann-Willenbrock, Nale, and Joseph A. Allen. 2020. “Well, Now What Do We Do? Wait…: A Group Process Analysis of Meeting Lateness.” International Journal of Business Communication 57 (3): 302–326. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Licoppe, Christian, and Sylvaine Tuncer. 2014. “Attending to a Summons and Putting Other Activities ‘On Hold’.” In Multiactivity in Social Interaction: Beyond Multitasking, ed. by Pentti Haddington, Tiina Keisanen, Lorenza Mondada, and Maurice Nevile, 167–190. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Licoppe, Christian, and Julian Morel. 2012. “Video-in-Interaction: “Talking Heads” and the Multimodal Organization of Mobile and Skype Video Calls.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 45 (2): 399–429. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Licoppe, Christian. 2017a. “Showing Objects in Skype Video-Mediated Conversations: From Showing Gestures to Showing Sequences.” Journal of Pragmatics 1101: 63–82. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2017b. “Skype Appearances, Multiple Greetings and ‘Coucou’. The Sequential Organization of Video-Mediated Conversation Openings.” Pragmatics 27 (3): 351–386.Google Scholar
Lindstrøm, Anna. 2005. “Language as Social Action. A Study of How Senior Citizens Request Assistance with Practical Tasks in the Swedish Home Help Service.” In Syntax and Lexis in Conversation. Studies on the Use of Linguistic Resources in Talk-in-Interaction, ed. by Auli Hakulinen, and Margret Selting, 209–230. Amsterdam, Philadelphia: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Markman, Kris M. 2009. “ʽSo What Shall We Talk Aboutʼ: Openings and Closings in Chat-Based Virtual Meetings.” The Journal of Business Communication 46 (1): 150–170. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mehus, Siri. 2005. “The Micro-Organization of Taking a Break: Transitions Between Task and Non-Task Activities at Work.” Proceedings of the Twelfth Annual Symposium about Language and Society, Austin, April 16–18, Texas, Linguistic Forum 481: 125–137.
Mlynář, Jakub, Esther González-Martínez, and Denis Lalanne. 2018. “Situated Organization of Video-Mediated Interaction: A Review of Ethnomethodological and Conversation Analytic Studies.” Interacting with Computers 30 (2): 73–84. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mondada, Lorenza. 2009. “Emergent Focused Interactions in Public Places: A Systematic Analysis of the Multimodal Achievement of a Common Interactional Space.” Journal of Pragmatics 411: 1977–97. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 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 logoGoogle Scholar
. 2011. “The Interactional Production of Multiple Spatialities Within a Participatory Democracy Meeting.” Social Semiotics 21 (2): 289–316. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2004. “Ways of ‘Doing Being Plurilingual’ in International Work Meetings.” In Second Language Conversation, ed. by Rod Gardner, and Johannes Wagner, 27–60. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
Mondada, Lorenza, and Reinhold Schmitt. 2010. “Zur Multimodalität von Situationseröffnungen.” In Situationseröffnungen. Zur multimodalen Herstellung fokussierter Interaktion, ed. by Lorenza Mondada, and Reinhold Schmitt. Tübingen: Narr Verlag.Google Scholar
Mondada, Lorenza. 2010. “Eröffnungen und Prä-Eröffnungen in medienvermittelter Interaktion: das Beispiel Videokonferenzen.” In Situationseröffnungen. Zur multimodalen Herstellung fokussierter Interaktion, ed. by Lorenza Mondada, and Reinhold Schmitt, 277–334. Tübingen: Narr Verlag.Google Scholar
Muñoz, Arantxa Santos. 2016. “Attending Multi-Party Videoconference Meetings: The Initial Problem.” Language@Internet 131, article 3. Google Scholar
Nielsen, Mie Femø. 2013. “ʽStepping Stonesʼ in Opening and Closing Department Meetings.” The Journal of Business Communication 50 (1): 34–67. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Oittinen, Tuire, and Arja Piirainen-Marsh. 2015. “Openings in Technology-Mediated Business Meetings.” Journal of Pragmatics 851: 47–66. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Oittinen, Tuire. 2018. “Multimodal Accomplishment of Alignment and Affiliation in the Local Space of Distant Meetings.” Culture and Organization 24 (1): 31–53. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Oloff, Florence. 2019. “Some Systematic Aspects of Self-Initiated Mobile Device Use in Face-to-Face Encounters.” Journal für Medienlinguistik 2 (2): 195–235. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Raclaw, Joshua, and Cecilia E. Ford. 2015. “Meetings as Interactional Achievements: A Conversation Analytic Perspective.” In The Science of Meetings at Work: The Cambridge Handbook of Meeting Science, ed. by Joseph A. Allen, Nale Lehmann-Willenbrock, and Steven G. Rogelberg. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rasmussen Hougaard, Gitte. 2008. “Membership Categorization in International Business Phonecalls: The Importance of ‘Being International’.” Journal of Pragmatics 40 (2): 307–332. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Relieu, Marc. 2009. “ʽMobile Phone Workʼ: Disengaging and Engaging Mobile Phone Activities with Concurrent Activities.” In The Reconstruction of Space and Time: Mobile Communication Practices, ed. by Rich Ling, and Scott W. Campbell, 215–229. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Rosenbaun, Laura, Sheizaf Rafaeli, and Dennis Kurzon. 2016. “Blurring the Boundaries between Domestic and Digital Spheres: Competing Engagements in Public Google Hangouts.” Pragmatics 261: 291–314.Google Scholar
Ruhleder, Karen, and Brigitte Jordan. 2001. “Co-Constructing Non-Mutual Realities: Delay-Generated Trouble.” Computer Supported Cooperative Work 101: 113–138. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Oshima, Sae, and Birte Asmuß. 2018. “Mediated Business: Living the Organizational Surroundings – Introduction.” Culture and Organization 24:1: 1–10. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schmitt, Reinhold. 2006. “Interaction in Work Meetings.” Revue française de linguistique appliquée 11 (2): 69–84. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rogelberg, Steven G., Clifton W. Scott, Brett Agypt, Jason Williams, John E. Kello, Tracy McCausland, and Jessi L. Olien. 2014. “Lateness to Meetings: Examination of an Unexplored Temporal Phenomenon.” European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology 23 (2): 323–341. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sutinen, Marike. 2014. “Negotiating Favourable Conditions for Resuming Suspended Activities.” In Multiactivity in Social Interaction: Beyond Multitasking, ed. by Pentti Haddington, Tiina Keisanen, Lorenza Mondada, and Maurice Nevile, 137–165. John Benjamins Publishing Company. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Svennevig, Jan. 2012. “Interaction in Workplace Meetings.” Discourse Studies 14 (1): 3–10. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2008. “Exploring Leadership Conversations.” Management Communication Quartely 21 (4): 529–536. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Svenning, Jan, and John E. Ruchinskas. 1984. “Organizational Teleconferencing.” In The New Media. The New Media: Communication, Research, and Technology, ed. by Ronald E. Rice, 217–248. Beverly Hills/CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Szymanski, Margaret H. 1999. “Re-Engaging and Dis-Engaging Talk in Activity.” Language in Society 28 (1): 1–23. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Veyrier, Claire Antoine. 2015. “Multiactivité et multimodalité dans les réunions à distance.” Reseaux (6): 11–37.Google Scholar
Wasson, Christina. 2006. “Being in Two Spaces at Once: Virtual Meetings and Their Representation.” Journal of Linguistic Anthropology 16 (1): 103–130. DOI logoGoogle Scholar