Article published in:
Pragmatics and Society
Vol. 8:1 (2017) ► pp. 129–153

Aligning caller and call-taker

The opening phrase of Dutch emergency calls

| University of Groningen | University of the Witwatersrand
| Utrecht University
This paper reports on conversation analytic research for the Dutch national emergency call-centre. In a corpus study of 120 emergency calls we show that callers’ orientations to their communicative tasks are not aligned to the institutional communicative tasks of the call-takers. In a subsequent workplace experiment involving over 2000 calls, it appeared that the use of an alternative question rather than a wh-question, significantly altered callers’ emergency deliveries and adapted them to call-takers’ communicative needs. The analysis shows two aspects of callers’ responses to the different question formats: (i) The alternative questions produced significantly more type-conforming answers than the wh-questions, and also (ii) callers treated their non-conforming answer to alternative question more often as dispreferred than their non-conforming answers to wh-questions. Callers thus treated the preference for type-conformity to be stronger for alternative questions than for wh-questions.
Keywords: emergency calls, conversation analysis, applied conversation analysis, type-conformity, preference organization


This article is currently available as a sample article.

Published online: 25 April 2017
https://doi.org/10.1075/ps.8.1.07koo

Full-text

Aligning caller and call-taker
References

References

Antaki, Charles
(ed.) 2011 Applied Conversation Analysis. Intervention and change in institutional talk. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Clayman, Steven & John Heritage
2002 The News Interview. Journalists and Public Figures on the Air. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cromdal, Jakob, Karin Osvaldsson & Daniel Persson-Thunqvist
2008 Context that matters: Producing “thick-enough descriptions” in initial emergency reports. Journal of Pragmatics 40 (2008) 927–959. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cromdal, Jakob, Hakan Landqvist, Daniel Persson-Thunqvist & Karin Osvaldsson
2012 Finding out what’s happened: Two procedures for opening emergency calls. Discourse Studies 14(4) 371–397. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Dovigo, Fabio & Ilaria Redaelli
2010 Knowledge Management in Locating the Patient in an Emergency Medical Service in Italy. Computer Supported Cooperative Work 19, 457–481. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Drew, Paul
2005 Conversation analysis. In K. L. Fitch & R. E. Sanders (eds.), Handbook of language and social interaction. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 71–102.Google Scholar
Englert, Christina
2010 Questions and responses in Dutch conversations. Journal of Pragmatics 42, 2666–2684. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Fele, Giolo
2008 The Collaborative Production of Responses and Dispatching on the Radio: Video Analysis in a Medical Emergency Call Center. Forum: Qualitative social research, 9(3), Art. 40.Google Scholar
[ p. 151 ]
Gaskell, George D., Colm A. O’Muircheataigh, and Daniel B. Wright
1994 Survey questions about the frequency of vaguely defined events: The effects of response alternatives. Public Opinion Quarterly 58 (2), 241–254. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Heritage, John
2008 Conversation Analysis as Social Theory. In Bryan Turner (ed.), The New Blackwell Companion to Social Theory. Oxford: Blackwell, 300–320.Google Scholar
2009 Negotiating the Legitimacy of Medical Problems A Multiphase Concern for Patients and Physicians. in: Dale Brashers and Deana Goldsmith (eds.), Communicating to Manage Health and Illness. New York: Routledge, 147–164.Google Scholar
Heritage, John & Jeffrey D. Robinson
2006 The Structure of Patients’ Presenting Concerns: Physicians’ Opening Questions. Health Communication 19(2), 89–102. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2011 ‘Some’ vs ‘Any’ Medical Issues: Encouraging Patients to Reveal Their Unmet Concerns. In Charles Antaki (ed.), Applied Conversation Analysis: Changing Institutional Practices. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 15–31. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Huiskes, Mike
2010 The role of the clause for turn-taking in Dutch conversation. Utrecht: LOT.Google Scholar
Houtkoop-Steenstra, Hanneke & Charles Antaki
1997 Creating Happy People by Asking Yes-No Questions. Research On Language and Social Interaction 30, 4, 285–315. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Imbens-Bailey, Alison & Allyssa McCabe
2000 The discourse of distress: a narrative analysis of emergency calls to 911. Language & Communication 20, 275–296. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Jefferson, Gail
2004 Glossary of transcript symbols with an introduction. In Gene H. Lerner (ed.), Conversation Analysis. Studies from the first generation. Pragmatics & Beyond New Series, Amsterdam: Benjamins, 13–31. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kitzinger, Celia
2011 Working with Childbirth Helplines: The Contributions and Limitations of Conversation Analysis. In Charles Antaki (ed.), Applied Conversation Analysis. Intervention and change in institutional talk. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 98–118. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Koole, Tom
2010 Displays of epistemic access. Student responses to teacher explanations. Research on Language and Social Interaction 43, 2, 183–209. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Koole, Tom, Nina Verberg & Claudia de Widt
2013 Omgaan met de onervaren beller: de opening van 112-gesprekken [Dealing with the inexperienced caller: the opening of emergency calls], Ronny Boogaart & Henrike Jansen (red.). Studies in Taalbeheersing 4. Assen: Van Gorcum, 223–232.Google Scholar
Koole, Tom & Pim Mak
2014 Using conversation analysis to improve an augmented communication tool. Research on Language and Social Interaction 47(3), 280–291. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Larsen, Tine
2013 Dispatching Emergency Assistance: Callers’ Claims of Entitlement and Call Takers’ Decisions. Research on Language and Social Interaction 46(3), 205–230. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Margutti, Piera
2006 Are you human beings? Order and knowledge construction through questioning in primary classroom interaction. Linguistics and Education 17, 313–346. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Paoletti, Isabella
2012 The issue of conversationally constituted context and localization problems in emergency calls. Text & Talk 32(2), 191–210. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
[ p. 152 ]
Peräkylä, Anssi & Sanna Vehviläinen
2003 Conversation Analysis and the professional stocks of interactional knowledge, Discourse & Society 14 (6), 727–750. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Pomerantz, Anita
1978 Compliment responses: notes on the cooperation of multiple constraints. In J. N. Schenkein (ed.), Studies in the organization of conversational interaction. New York: Academic Press, 79–112. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1984 Agreeing and disagreeing with assessments: some featrues of preferred/dispreferred turn shapes. In J. M. Atkinson & J. Heritage (eds.), Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 57–101.Google Scholar
Pomerantz, Anita B. J. Fehr
1997 Conversation Analysis: An Approach to the Study of Social Action as Sense Making Practices. In Teun A. van Dijk (ed.), Discourse as Social Interaction. London: Sage, 64–91.Google Scholar
Pomerantz, Anita & John Heritage
2013 Preference. In Jack Sidnell & Tanya Stivers. 2013. The Handbook of Conversation Analysis. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell, 210–228.Google Scholar
Raymond, Geoffrey
2003 Grammar and Social Organization: Yes/No Interrogatives and the Structure of Responding. American Sociological Review 68, 6, 939–967. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Raymond, Geoffrey & Don H. Zimmerman
2007 Rights and responsibilities in calls for help: The case of the Mountain Glade Fire. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 40, (1): 33–61. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Sacks, Harvey
1987 On the preferences for agreement and contiguity in sequences in conversation. In G. Button & J. R. E. Lee (eds.), Talk and social organisation. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters, 54–69.Google Scholar
1992 Lectures on Conversation. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Sacks, Harvey, Emanuel A. Schegloff & Gail Jefferson
1974 A Simplest Systematics for the Organization of Turn-Taking for Conversation, Language 50, 4, 696–735. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Sacks, Harvey & Emanuel A. Schegloff
1979 Two Preferences in the Organization of Reference to Persons and Their Interaction. In G. Psathas (ed.), Everyday Language: Studies in Ethnomethodology. New York: Irvington Publishers, 15–21.Google Scholar
Schegloff, Emanuel A.
1968 Sequencing in Conversational Openings. American Anthropologist 70, 1075–1095. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1972 Notes on a Conversation Practice: Formulating Place. In David Sudnow (ed.), Studies in Social Interaction. New York: The Free Press, 75–119.Google Scholar
2007 Sequence Organization in Interaction. A Primer in Conversation Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Schegloff, Emanuel A. & Gene H. Lerner
2009 Beginning to Respond: Well-Prefaced Responses to Wh-Questions. Research on Language and Social Interaction 42(2), 91–115. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Sidnell, Jack & Tanya Stivers
2013 The Handbook of Conversation Analysis. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Stivers, Tanya & John Heritage
2001 Breaking the sequential mold: Answering ‘more than the question’ during comprehensive history taking. Text 21 (1.2), 151–185.Google Scholar
Ten Have, Paul
2007 Doing Conversation Analysis. A Practical Guide. London: Sage. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Tracy, Sarah J. & Karen Tracy
1998 Emotion Labor at 911: a Case Study and Theoretical Critique. Journal of Applied Communication Research 26, 390–411. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
[ p. 153 ]
Vinkhuyzen, Erik, Marilyn Whalen & Margaret Szymanski
2006 Security, efficiency, and customer service in calls to a financial services organization. Revue Française de Linguistique Appliquée 11/2. 53–68.Google Scholar
Whalen, Marilyn R. & Don H. Zimmerman
1987 Sequential and institutional contexts in calls for help. Social Psychology Quarterly 50. 172–185. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1990 Describing trouble: Practical epistemology in citizen calls to the police. Language in Society 19, 465–492. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Whalen, Jack, Don H. Zimmerman
1998 Observations on the display and managment of emotion in naturally occurring activities: the case of “Hysteria” in calls to 9-1-1. Social Psychological Quarterly 61. 141–159. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Zimmerman, Don H.
1984 Talk and Its Occasion: The Case of Calling the Police. In D. Schiffrin (ed.), Meaning, Form, and Use in Context: Linguistic Applications. Washington DC: Georgetown University Press, 172–185.Google Scholar
1992 The interactional organization of calls for emergency. In P. Drew, J. Heritage (eds.), Talk at work: interaction in institutional settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 418–469.Google Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 4 other publications

Erkelens, Daphne C., Tessa C. van Charldorp, Vera V. Vinck, Loes T. Wouters, Roger A. Damoiseaux, Frans H. Rutten, Dorien L. Zwart & Esther de Groot
2021. Interactional implications of either/or-questions during telephone triage of callers with chest discomfort in out-of-hours primary care: A conversation analysis. Patient Education and Counseling 104:2 ► pp. 308 ff. Crossref logo
Herder, Anke, Jan Berenst, Kees de Glopper & Tom Koole
2020. Sharing knowledge with peers: Epistemic displays in collaborative writing of primary school children. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction 24 ► pp. 100378 ff. Crossref logo
Koole, Tom
2015. The Interaction Tool. Dutch Journal of Applied Linguistics 4:1 ► pp. 86 ff. Crossref logo
Penn, Claire, Tom Koole & Rhona Nattrass
2017. When seconds count: A study of communication variables in the opening segment of emergency calls. Journal of Health Psychology 22:10 ► pp. 1256 ff. Crossref logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 16 january 2022. 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.