Part of
From Gesture in Conversation to Visible Action as Utterance: Essays in honor of Adam KendonEdited by Mandana Seyfeddinipur and Marianne Gullberg
[Not in series 188] 2014
► pp. 35–56
Edited by Mandana Seyfeddinipur and Marianne Gullberg
[Not in series 188] 2014
► pp. 35–56
Mutual gaze and recognition
Revisiting Kendon’s “Gaze direction in two-person conversation”
In “Some functions of gaze direction in two-person conversation,” Adam Kendon provided the first systematic account of the organization of gaze in conversational interaction, arguing that here gaze behavior serves the regulation of speaker- and listenership. Recently, Rossano (2012) has argued that gaze direction, instead, operates in the context of action sequences and varies by action type. This chapter describes the gaze behavior of a single person in interactions with a variety of others. The focus is on a routine gaze sequence, consonant with Rossano’s account, whose initiator establishes transitory or sustained gaze with the recipient during the initial action, and both parties withdraw gaze from one another during sequence completion. Arguably this patterns shows that mutual gaze can serve as a minimal form of social contract by which acts are ratified as intersubjective facts.
References
Bavelas, Janet B., Coates, Linda, and Johnson, Trudy
2002 “Listener responses as a collaborative process: The role of gaze.” Journal of Communication 52 (3): 566–580. 
Goodwin, Charles
1980 “Restarts, pauses, and the achievement of a state of mutual gaze at turn-beginning.” Sociological Inquiry 50: 272–302.
1981 Conversational Organization: Interaction between Speakers and Hearers. New York: Academic Press.
2003 “The body in action.” In Discourse, the Body and Identity, Justine Coupland and Richard Gwyn (eds), 19–42. New York: Palgrave/Macmillan.
Goodwin, Charles, and Goodwin, Marjorie H
1992 “Context, activity and participation.” In
The Contextualization of Language
, Peter Auer and Aldo di Luzio(eds), 77–99. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
1996 “Formulating planes: Seeing as a situated activity.” In Cognition and Communication at Work, David Middleton and Yrjö Engestrom (eds), 61–95. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Gullberg, Marianne, and Holmqvist, Kenneth
2003 “What speakers do and what addressees look at: Visual attention to gestures in human interaction live and on video.” Pragmatics and Cognition 14 (1): 53–83.
Hausendorf, Heiko
2003 “Deixis and speech situation revisited: The mechanism of perceived perception.” In Deictic Conceptualization of Space, Time and Person, Friedrich Lenz, (ed.), 249–269. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Heath, Christian
1986 Body Movement and Speech in Medical Interaction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hegel, Georg Wilhelm Friedrich
1967 System der Sittlichkeit. Hamburg: Felix Meiner.
Honneth, Axel
1996 The Struggle for Recognition. Oxford: Polity Press.
Kendon, Adam
1967 “Some functions of gaze direction in two-person conversation.” Acta Psychologica 26: 22–63.
1979 “Some emerging features of face-to-face interaction studies.” Sign Language Studies 22: 7–22.
Mead, George Herbert.
1934 Mind, Self and Society. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Rossano, Federico
2012 Gaze Behavior in Face-to-face Interaction. Ph. D. dissertation, Max-Planck Institut for Psycholinguistics, Nijmegen.
Rossano, Federico, Brown, Penelope, and Levinson, Stephen C
2009 “Gaze, questioning and culture.” In Conversation Analysis: Comparative Perspectives, Jack Sidnell (ed.), 187–249. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Sacks, Harvey, and Schegloff, Emanuel A
1979 “Two preferences in the organization of reference to persons in conversation and their interaction.” In Everyday Language. Studies in Ethnomethodology, George Psathas (ed.), 15–21. New York: Irvington Publishers.
Schegloff, Emanuel A
1982 “Discourse as in interactional achievement: Some uses of ‘uh huh’ and other things that come between sentences.” In Analyzing Discourse: Text and Talk, Deborah Tannen (ed.), 71–93. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
Stivers, Tanya, and Rossano, Federico
2010 “Mobilizing response.” Research on Language & Social Interaction 43 (1): 3–31.
Streeck, Jürgen
1993 “Gesture as communication I: Its coordination with gaze and speech.” Communication Monographs 60: 275–299.
2008 “Laborious intersubjectivity: Attentional struggle and embodied communication in an auto-shop.” In Embodied Communication in Humans and Machines, Ipke Wachsmuth, Manuela Lenzen and Guenther Knoblich (eds), 202–228. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Cited by
Cited by 5 other publications
Kosmala, Loulou
2022. Exploring the status of filled pauses as pragmatic markers. Pragmatics & Cognition 29:2 ► pp. 272 ff. 
Nielsen, Søren Beck
2021. Interactional integration of talk and note-taking. Psychology of Language and Communication 25:1 ► pp. 145 ff.
Thorsson, Max, Martyna A. Galazka, Jakob Åsberg Johnels & Nouchine Hadjikhani
2024. Influence of autistic traits and communication role on eye contact behavior during face-to-face interaction. Scientific Reports 14:1
Vranjes, Jelena, Geert Brône & Kurt Feyaerts
2018. On the role of gaze in the organization of turn-taking and sequence organization in interpreter-mediated dialogue. Language and Dialogue 8:3 ► pp. 439 ff.
[no author supplied]
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 19 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.