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 13 april 2024. 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.