Cover not available
Article published In:
Pragmatics and Society
Vol. 6:4 (2015) ► pp.593–614

Building rapport through sequentially linked joke-serious responses in Second Language job interviews

This study aims to explicate interviewer and candidate conversational practices in L2 job interviews as they relate to the assessment of a candidate’s qualification for a particular position. The data consisted of 27 audio-recorded job interviews for the position of student assistant in English classes at a Japanese university. The analysis of these interactional data, conducted using conversational analysis methodology, revealed that the inadequacy of a candidate’s response is constructed by means of the interviewer’s subsequent pursuit of a relevant answer from the candidate. In addition, a candidate’s ability to build rapport by providing sequentially linked joke-serious responses evoked a positive evaluation from the interviewer. The findings indicate that a candidate’s understanding of expected behaviors and ability to accommodate his or her behaviors in a manner relevant to the interaction result in a positive assessment.

Keywords: conversation analysis, rapport, joking, L2 job interview, sequential practice, question and answer
Published online: 21 December 2015
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/ps.6.4.06oka
References
Bilmes, Jack
1985 “‘Why That Now?’ Two Kinds of Conversational Meaning.” Discourse processes8 (3): 319–355. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1988 “Category and Rule in Conversation Analysis.” IPrA Papers in Pragmatics2 (1): 25–59. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brown, Annie
2003 “Interviewer Variation and the Co-Construction of Speaking Proficiency.” Language Testing20 (1): 1–25. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brutton, Graham
1992 “Answers as Interactional Products: Two Sequential Practices Used in Job Interviews.” In Talk at Work: Interaction and Institutional Settings, ed. by Paul Drew and John Heritage, 212–231. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Drew, Paul
1997 “‘Open’ Class Repair Initiators in Response to Sequential Sources of Troubles in Conversation.” Journal of Pragmatics28 (1): 69101. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Glenn, Philipp
2010 “Interviewer Laughs: Shared Laughter and Asymmetries in Employment Interviews.” Journal of Pragmatics42 (6): 1485–1498. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2013 “Interviewees’ Volunteered Laughter in Employment Interviews: A Case of Nervous Laughter?”InStudies of Laughter in Interaction, ed. byPhilipp Glenn and 
Elizabeth Holt, 255–275. London: Bloomsbury Academic. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Greer, Tim, Vivian Bussinguer, Jeff Butterfield, and Agnes Mischinger
2009 “Receipt through Repetition.” JALT Journal 31 (1): 5–34. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heritage, John, and Steven Clayman
2010 Talk in Action: Interactions, Identities, and Institutions. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hosoda, Megumi, and Eugene Stone-Romero
2010.“The Effects of Foreign Accents on Employment-Related Decisions.” Journal of Managerial Psychology25 (2): 113–132. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hosoda, Megumi, Lam T. Nguyen, and Eugene Stone-Romero
2012 “The Effect of Hispanic Accents on Employment Decisions.” Journal of Managerial Psychology27 (4): 347–364. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Houtkoop-Steenstra, Hanneke
2000 Interaction and the Standardized Survey Interview. 
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hutchby, Ian, and Robin Wooffitt
2008 Conversation Analysis: Principles, Practices and Implications. 2nd ed. Cambridge: Polity.Google Scholar
Jefferson, Gail
1984 “On the Organization of Laughter in Talk about Troubles.”InStructures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis, ed. byJohn Maxwell Atkinson and John Heritage, 346–369. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kasper, Gabriele
2006 “Beyond Repair: Conversation Analysis as an Approach to SLA.” AILA Review191: 83–99. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kasper, Gabriele, and Steven J. Ross
2003 “Repetition as a Source of Miscommunication in Oral Proficiency Interviews.”InMisunderstanding in Social Life, ed. byJuliane House, 
Gabriele Kasper, and Steven Ross, 82–106. London: Longman/Pearson Education.Google Scholar
2007 “Multiple Questions in Oral Proficiency Interviews.” Journal of Pragmatics39 (11): 2045–2070. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kassim, Hafizoah, and Fatimah Ali
2010 “English Communicative Events and Skills Needed at the Workplace: Feedback from the Industry.” English for Specific Purposes29 (3): 168–182. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kerekes, Julia A
2006.“Winning an Interviewer’s Trust in a Gatekeeping Encounter.” Language in Society35 (1): 27–57. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2007 “The Co-Construction of a Gatekeeping Encounter: An Inventory of Verbal Actions.” Journal of Pragmatics39 (11): 1942–1973. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Levashina, Julia, Christopher J. Hartwell, Frederick P. Morgeson, and Michael A Campion
2014 “The Structured Employment Interview: Narrative and Quantitative Review of the Research Literature.” Personnel Psychology67 (1): 241–293. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Llewellyn, Nick
2010 “On the Reflexivity between Setting and Practice: The ‘Recruitment Interview’.”InOrganisation, Interaction and Practice: Studies of Ethnomethodology and Conversation Analysis, ed. byNick Llewellyn and Jon Hindmarsh, 74–95. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Llewellyn, Nick, and Laura Spence
2009 “Practice as a Members’ Phenomenon.” Organization Studies30 (12) 1419–1439. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Markee, Numa, and Gabriele Kasper
2004 “Classroom Talks: An Introduction.” The Modern Language Journal88 (4): 491–500. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Maynard, Douglas W., and Nora C. Schaeffer
2006 “Standardization-in-Interaction: The Survey Interview.”InTalk and Interaction in Social Research Methods, ed. byPaul Drew, Geoff Raymond, and Darin Weinberg, 9–27. London: Sage. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Maynard, Douglas W., Hanneke Houtkoop-Steenstra, Nora Cate Schaeffer, Johannes van der Zouwen
(eds) 2002 Standardization and Tacit Knowledge: Interaction and Practice in the Survey Interview. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
McNamara, Tim, and Carsten Roever
2006 Language Testing: The Social Dimension. Malden, Mass: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Okada, Yusuke
2010 “Role-Play in Oral Proficiency Interviews: Interactive Footing and Interactional Competencies.” Journal of Pragmatics42 (6): 1647–1668. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2013 “Prioritization: A Formulation Practice and its Relevance for Interaction in Teaching and Testing Contexts.”InPragmatics and Language LearningVol. 131, ed. byTim Greer, Donna Tatsuki, and Carsten Roever, 55–77. Honolulu, Hawai’i: National Foreign Language Resource Center.Google Scholar
Okada, Yusuke, and Tim Greer
2013 “Pursuing a Relevant Response in OPI Role-Plays.”InAssessing Second Language Pragmatics, ed. bySteven J. Ross and Gabriele Kasper, 294–316. Basingstoke: Palgrave-Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pike, Kenneth L
1967 Language in Relation to a Unified Theory of the Structures of Human Behavior. 2nd ed. The Hague: Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Potter, Jonathan, and Alexa Hepburn
2005 “Qualitative Interviews in Psychology: Problems and Possibilities.” Qualitative Research in Psychology2 (4): 281–307. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2010 “Putting Aspiration Into Words: ‘Laugh Particles’, Managing Descriptive Trouble and Modulating Action.” Journal of Pragmatics42 (6): 1543–1555. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Raymond, Geoffrey
2004 “Prompting Action: The Stand-Alone ‘so’ in Ordinary Conversation.” Research on Language and Social Interaction37 (2): 185-218. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ross, Steven J
2007 “Comparative Task-in-Interaction Analysis of OPI Backsliding.” Journal of Pragmatics39 (11): 2017–2044. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sacks, Harvey
1992 Lectures on Conversation, Vol. I & II1. Ed. byGail Jefferson. Oxford: 
Blackwell.Google Scholar
Sacks, Harvey, and Emanuel A. Schegloff
1979 “Two Preferences in the Organization of Reference to Persons in Conversation and Their Interaction.” InEveryday Language: Studies in Ethnomethodology, ed. byGeorge Psathas, 15–21. New York: Irvington Press.Google Scholar
Sacks, Harvey, Emanuel A. Schegloff, and Gail Jefferson
1974 “A Simplest Systematics for the Organization of Turn-Taking for Conversation.” Language50 (4): 696–735. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schegloff, Emanuel. A
1982 “Discourse as an Interactional Achievement: Some Uses of ‘uh huh’ and Other Things that Come Between Sentences.”InAnalyzing Discourse: Text and Talk, ed. byDeborah Tannen, 71–93. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
1987 “Some Sources of Misunderstanding in Talk-in-Interaction.” Linguistics25 (1): 201–218. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schegloff, Emanuel A
1999 “’Schegloff’s Texts’ as ‘Billig’s Data’: A Critical Reply.” Discourse & Society10 (4): 558–572. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Seedhouse, Paul
2005 “Conversation Analysis as a Research Methodology.”InApplying Conversation Analysis, ed. byKeith Richards and Paul Seedhouse, 251–266. Basingstoke: Palgrave-­Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2013 “Oral proficiency Interviews as Varieties of Interaction.”InAssessing Second Language Pragmatics, ed. bySteven J. Ross and Gabriele Kasper, 199–219. 
Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Shaw, Chlouë, Alexa Hepburn, and Jonathan Potter
2013 “Having the Last Laugh: On Post Completion Laughter Particles.”InStudies of Laughter in Interaction, ed. byPhilipp Glenn and Elizabeth Holt, 91–106. London: Bloomsbury Publishing. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
ten Have, Paul
2007 Doing Conversation Analysis. 2nd ed. London: Sage. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wang, Haidan
2011 “Chinese for Business Professionals: The Workplace Needs and Business Chinese Textbooks.” Global Business Languages16 (1): 27–42.Google Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 3 other publications

Peña-Acuña, Beatriz
2023. Trending Topics about Performance in Second Language Learning . East European Journal of Psycholinguistics DOI logo
Sheikhan, Amir & Michael Haugh
2023. Epistemics and conversational humour in intercultural first conversations. In The Pragmatics of Humour in Interactive Contexts [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series, 335], ► pp. 110 ff. DOI logo
Zhang, Don C.
2022. Horse-Sized Ducks or Duck-Sized Horses? Oddball Personality Questions Are Likable (but Useless) for Organizational Recruitment. Journal of Business and Psychology 37:1 ► pp. 215 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 1 september 2023. 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.