Navigating the complex social ecology of screen-based activity in video-mediated interaction
UfukBalaman and SimonaPekarek Doehler
Hacettepe University | University of Neuchâtel
Task-oriented video-mediated interaction takes place within a complex digital-social ecology which presents, to
participants, a practical problem of social coordination: How to navigate, in mutually accountable ways, between interacting with
the remote co-participants and scrutinizing one’s own screen –which suspends interaction–, for instance when searching for
information on a search engine. Using conversation analysis for the examination of screen-recorded dyadic interactions, this study
identifies a range of practices participants draw on to alert co-participants to incipient suspensions of talk. By accounting for
such suspensions as being task-related through verbal alerts, typically in the form let me/let’s X, participants
successfully ‘buy time’, which allows them to fully concentrate on their screen activity and thereby ensure the progression of
task accomplishment. We discuss how these findings contribute to our understanding of the complex ecologies of technology-mediated
Geographically dispersed participants’ video-mediated interactions (henceforth VMIs), require moment-by-moment coordination
between individual participants’ ‘private’ (i.e., mutually non-accessible) orientations to screens and their ‘public’ participation to
ongoing talk-in-interaction (Heath and Luff 1993, 2000; Jenks and Brandt 2013; Oittinen and
Piirainen-Marsh 2015). Such contextual requirements become particularly significant in online task-oriented settings where
task accomplishment is largely dependent on the successful management of the coordination work (Balaman and Sert 2017a; Balaman 2018, 2019), and where individual participants’ orientation to the multisemiotic resources (e.g. texts, images; cf. Goodwin 2013, 2018) for task-accomplishment made
available through screens may suspend joint engagement in talk-in-interaction, and therefore possibly cause interactional trouble
(Brandt 2011; Brandt and Jenks 2013; Balaman
and Sert 2017b; Sert and Balaman 2018). In these situations, participants are faced with the practical problem of navigating, in
mutually recognizable ways, between social interaction with remote co-participants and the scrutiny of their own screen, for instance
when searching for information on a given search engine (Näslund 2016). While exactly these
searches are instrumental for the accomplishment of the joint task, they represent a potential source of interactional trouble, as
they typically suspend talk, and hence may impede the progressivity of social interaction (Rintel
2010, 2013; Olbertz-Siitonen
Interaction: Studies of Talk at Work. Routledge.
Arminen, Ilkka, Inka Koskela, and Hannele Palukka
Production of Second Pair Parts in Air Traffic Control Training.” Journal of
Pragmatics 65: 46–62.
Arminen, Ilkka, Christian Licoppe, and Anna Spagnolli
Mediated Interaction.” Research on Language and Social
Interaction 49 (4): 290–309.
Development of Hinting Behaviors in Online Task-Oriented L2 Interaction.” Language
Learning, 21. 10125/44640
Balaman, Ufuk, and Olcay Sert
Coordination of Online L2 Interaction and Orientations to Task Interface for Epistemic
Progression.” Journal of
Pragmatics 115 (July): 115–29.
Balaman, Ufuk, and Olcay Sert
of L2 Interactional Resources for Online Collaborative Task Accomplishment.” Computer Assisted
Learning 30 (7): 601–30.
Organization of Hinting in Online Task-Oriented L2 Interaction.” Text &
Talk 39 (4): 511–34.
Silence: Life in the World of Total
Meaning.” Semiotica 98 (1–2): 73–88.
Maintenance of Mutual Understanding in Online Second Language Talk.” PhD
Thesis, Newcastle University.
Brandt, Adam, and Christopher Jenks
Spoken Interaction: Aspects of Trouble in Multi-Party Chat
Rooms.” Language@Internet 10: 1–21.
2015 “The Social Construction of a
Glasshole: Google Glass and Multiactivity in Social Interaction.” PsychNology
Journal 13 (2): 149–178.
Gardner, Rod, and Mike Levy
Coordination of Talk and Action in the Collaborative Construction of a Multimodal
Text.” Journal of
Pragmatics 42 (8): 2189–2203.
1967Studies in ethnomethodology. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hal.
Program: Working out Durkheim’s Aphorism. Rowman & Littlefield
Co-Operative, Transformative Organization of Human Action and Knowledge.” Journal of
Pragmatics 46 (1): 8–23.
Action. Cambridge University Press.
Harness, and Charles Goodwin
and Coparticipation in the Activity of Searching for a
Word.” Semiotica, 62(1–2): 51–76.
Haddington, Pentti, Tiina Keisanen, Lorenza Mondada, and Maurice Nevile
in Social Interaction: Beyond Multitasking. John Benjamins Publishing
Heath, Christian, and Paul Luff
Conduct: Interactional Asymmetries in Video-Mediated
Communication.” In Technology in Working Order: Studies of Work,
Interaction, and Technology, edited by Graham Button, 35–54. Routledge.
Heath, Christian, and Paul Luff
in Action. Cambridge University Press.
and Progressivity in Person (and Place) Reference.” In Person
Reference in Interaction: Linguistic, Cultural and Social Perspectives, edited
J. Enfield and Tanya Stivers, 255:255–80. Cambridge
of Organizing Built Space in Videoconference-Mediated Interactions.” Research on Language and
Interaction 49 (4): 325–41.
2020 “Self-Authorizing Action: On Let
Me X in English Social Interaction.” Language in
of Transcript Symbols with an Introduction. In. Conversation
Analysis, Studies from First Generation, edited by Gene Lerner, 13–34. Amsterdam: John
Joseph, and Adam Brandt
Mutual Orientation in the Absence of Physical Copresence: Multiparty Voice-Based Chat Room
Processes 50 (4): 227–48.
Knight, Janine, Melinda Dooly, and Elena Barberà
Meaning Making: Navigational Acts in Online Speaking
Tasks.” System 78: 65–78.
Licoppe, Christian, and Julien Morel
Text and Talk, and the Systematic Organization of Interaction in Periscope Live Video
Studies 20 (5): 637–65.
Luff, Paul, Christian Heath, Hideaki Kuzuoka, Jon Hindmarsh, Keiichi Yamazaki, and Shinya Oyama
Luff, Paul, Christian Heath, Naomi Yamashita, Hideaki Kuzuoka, and Marina Jirotka
Reference: Translocating Gestures in Video-Mediated Interaction.” Research on Language and
Interaction 49 (4): 342–61.
Mlynář, Jakub, Esther González-Martínez, and Denis Lalanne
Organization of Video-Mediated Interaction: A Review of Ethnomethodological and Conversation Analytic
Studies.” Interacting with
Computers 30 (2): 73–84.
Temporal Orders of Multiactivity.” In Multiactivity in Social
Interaction: Beyond Multitasking, edited by Pentti Haddington, Tiina Keisanen, Lorenza Mondada, and Maurice Nevile, 33–75. John
Tango: The Social Framework of Screen-Focused Silence in Institutional Telephone
Calls.” Journal of
Pragmatics 91 (January): 60–79.
Accomplishment of Alignment and Affiliation in the Local Space of Distant Meetings.” Culture
Organization 24 (1): 31–53.
Oittinen, Tuire, and Arja Piirainen-Marsh
in Technology-Mediated Business Meetings.” Journal of
Pragmatics 85: 47–66.
Delay in Technology-Mediated Interaction at Work.” PsychNology
Journal 13 (2–3): 203–34.
Grammar for All Practical Purposes: The On-line Formating of Dislocated Constructions in French
Conversation.” In Constructions: Emerging and
Emergent, edited by Peter Auer and Stefan Pfänder, 46–88. Mouton
Doehler, Simona and Anne-Sylvie Horlacher
Patching together of Pivot-patterns in Talk-in-interaction: On ‘Double Dislocations’ in
French. Journal of
Pragmatics 53: 92–108.
Doehler, Simona and Ufuk Balaman
Routinization of Grammar as a Social Action Format: A Longitudinal Study of Video-mediated
Interactions”. Research on Language and Social Interaction.
2010 “Conversational Management of
Network Trouble Perturbations in Personal
Videoconferencing.” In Proceedings of the 22nd Conference of the
Computer-Human Interaction Special Interest Group of Australia on Computer-Human
Calling in Long-Distance Relationships: The Opportunistic Use of Audio/Video Distortions as a Relational
Resource.” The Electronic Journal of Communication/La Revue Electronic de Communication
Sacks, Harvey, and Emanuel
Preferences in the Organization Ofreference to Persons in Conversation and Their
Interaction.” In Everyday Language: Studies in
Ethnomethodology, edited by George Pathas, 15–21. New
York: Irvington Publishers.
Sacks, Harvey, Emanuel
A. Schegloff, and Gail Jefferson
Simplest Systematics for the Organization of Turn-Taking for
Conversation.” Language 50 (4): 696–735.
Sert, Olcay, and Ufuk Balaman
to Negotiated Language and Task Rules in Online L2
Interaction.” ReCALL 30 (3): 355–74.
1979 “The Relevance of Repair to
Syntax-for-Conversation.” In Discourse and
Syntax, edited by Talmy Givon, 261–86. New
York: Academic Press.
1996 “Turn Organization: One
Intersection of Grammar and Interaction.” In Interaction and
Grammar, edited by Elinor Ochs, Emanuel
A. Schegloff, and Sandra
A. Thompson, 52–133. Cambridge
2007Sequence Organization in Interaction: A
Primer in Conversation Analysis I. Cambridge University
Stivers, Tanya, and Jeffrey
Preference for Progressivity in Interaction.” Language in
Society 35 (3): 367–92.
2007Human-machine Reconfigurations. Plans
and Situated Actions. Cambridge University Press.
Tuncer, Sylvaine, Oskar Lindwall, and Barry Brown
time: Pausing to coordinate video ınstructions and practical tasks”. Symbolic
Technology of Order Production: Computer-Aided Dispatch in Public Safety
Communications.” In Situated Order: Studies in the Social
Organization of Talk and Embodied Activities, edited by Paul
ten Have and George Psathas, 187–230. Washington
DC: University Press of America.
a Reference in Aphasic Talk and Normal Talk.” Discourse
Processes, 46(2–3), 206–225.