Dispreferred responses when texting
Delaying that ‘no’ response
Datos Bibliográficos
| ID | 7431289 |
|---|---|
| Autores | Johanna Rendle‐short (0000-0002-4916-1118, Australian National University, autor de correspondencia) |
| Año | 2015 |
| Volumen | 9 |
| Número | 6 |
| Páginas | 643-661 |
| Fecha de publicación | 2015-09-21 |
| Peer Reviewed | Sí |
| Open Access | Sí |
| Tipo | ARTICLE |
| Revista | Discourse & Communication (JOURNAL) |
| Identificadores de la revista | ISSN: 1750-4813 • E-ISSN: 1750-4821 |
| Editorial | SAGE Publishing (PUBLISHER • US) |
| DOI | 10.1177/1750481315600309 |
| OpenAlex | W2179453393 |
| Idioma | EN |
| Citas recibidas | 7 |
| Referencias citadas | 17 |
Socially, people find it difficult to say ‘no’ to requests or invitations. In spoken interaction (face-to-face), we orient to this difficulty through the design of our responses. An agreement response (preferred) is characteristically said straightaway with minimal gap between request and response. A disagreement response (dispreferred) is characteristically delayed through silence and by prefacing the disagreement turn with tokens such as ‘well’, ‘uhm’ and ‘uh’ or with accounts as to why the recipient cannot accept the request or invitation. The question for this article concerns what occurs when requests or invitations are made via texting. The results from 329 texting interactions showed that if responses to a request or invitation were delayed by more than 1 minute, it was much more likely be a ‘no’ rather than a ‘yes’ response ( p < 0.001). In other words, preferred responses were sent quickly; dispreferred responses were delayed. Understanding texting as social interaction is increasingly important as the range of communicative options continues to widen (e.g. Facebook, Short Message Service (SMS), Multimedia Messaging Service (MMS), Instant Messaging (IM), email). This study shows preference organisation similarities between spoken interaction and texting with texters orienting to social norms concerning delayed responses. Further research is needed to understand in what contexts a person might choose one communicative medium over another
Silence · Digital Communication and Language · Language, Discourse, Communication Strategies · Speech and dialogue systems
Requesting on WhatsApp
Methodological approaches applicable to patient-provider interaction analysis
Displaying consideration via EHM (‘uhm’) in Hebrew WhatsApp dialogues
Influence of professional mobile device usage on Work/Family Border Theory
Bringing identities to the table
Challenging askability through particles
Distort, Extort, Deceive and Exploit
Doing Conversation Analysis
Language and the Internet
On the Preferences for Agreement and Contiguity in Sequences in Conversation
Address terms in the service of other actions
Agreeing and disagreeing with assessments
Glossary of transcript symbols with an introduction
Garfinkel and Ethnomethodology
Sequence Organization in Interaction
IMing, Text Messaging, and Adolescent Social Networks
A Conversation Analysis View of Communication as Jointly Accomplished Social Interaction
Catherine, you're wasting your time
A Simplest Systematics for the Organization of Turn-Taking for Conversation
Pragmatics
| Obras citantes distintas | 7 |
|---|---|
| Citas por año | 1,4 |
| Intervalo de citas | 2021 - 2024 (4) |
| Velocidad de citación | recent |
| Altamente citado | No |
| Tipos de cita | Neutras: 7 |