digc102 week 8 dr andrew whelan conversation analysis online

8/14/2019 Digc102 Week 8 Dr Andrew Whelan Conversation Analysis Online

1/18

DIGC 102 week 8:

Conversation Analysis andDiscourse Analysis

Online

Andrew Whelan

[email protected]


2/18

Overview:

Why the methodological interest in interactional data? What discourse analysis / conversation analysis (CA) look like, and

the kinds of things they do.

Online applications: CA and government policy, an example: pro-ana and the clean feed CA and market research, an example: fan communities CA and social identity online, an example: masculinity in talk

The structure and contentof online interaction


3/18

Why the methodological interest in interactional data?

conversation is a (or maybe the) prime

site for examining the intersubjective

construction of meaning and social

order (2000: 287).

Weatherall, Ann. 2000. Gender relevance in talk-in-interaction and

discourse. Discourse and Societyvol. 11, no. 2, pp. 286-288.


4/18


This interest is opposed to theoretical imperialism, to

grand theorizing and abstracted

empiricism (1984: 2).

Heritage, John. 1984. Garfinkel and Ethnomethodology. Cambridge: Polity

Press.


5/18


[Reality] doesnt exist in and of itself, outside ofor beneath everyday events as a socialstructure or social force, as depicted intraditional structural accounts. Instead we arguethat it is daily constructedby us in routine andmundane ways, as we go about the ordinary andeveryday business of living (1983: 112).

Stanley, Liz and Sue Wise. 1983. Breaking Out: FeministConsciousness and Feminist Research. London: Routledge &Kegan Paul.


6/18


Methodological naturalism:

every effort is made to maintain a direct focus

on the specifics of interaction which is naturallyoccurringand uncontaminated by interventions

from the researcher (1987: 258).

Heritage, John. 1987. Ethnomethodology. Pp. 224-272 in Social TheoryToday, edited by Anthony Giddens and Jonathan Turner. Oxford: PolityPress.


7/18


The discipline of conversation analysis is an artefact of

recording technology:

conversation is something that we can get the

actual happenings of on tape at least whatwas on the tape had happened (1984: 25-26).

Sacks, Harvey. 1984. Notes on methodology. Pp. 21-27 in Structures of

Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis, edited by J. MaxwellAtkinson and John Heritage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.


8/18


Similarly with online conversation analysis:

CMC [computer-mediated communication] isarguably the greatest boon to the study of

language use since the invention of the portabletape recorder in the 1950s (1996: 155).

Herring, Susan. 1996. Linguistic and Critical Analysis of Computer-Mediated Communication: Some Ethical and ScholarlyConsiderations. The Information Societyvol. 12, no. 2, pp. 153-168.


9/18


The benefit of such a micro-analytic focus is that itaddresses the how question, it binds the [interpretiveand analytic] claims to actual data, it reveals (rather thanconceals) how the analysis was conducted, it invitesreflexive re-interpretations, and it provides a concretemodel for analysing similar segments of data. Within adiscursive analytic paradigm, the goals of descriptiverigor, context specificity, and particularization are keyevaluative criteria (2005: 230).

Korobov, Neill. 2005. Ironizing Masculinity: How adolescent boys negotiate hetero-

normative dilemmas in conversational interaction. The Journal of Mens Studies vol.13, no. 2, pp. 225-246.


10/18

The concern for both conversation analysis and discourse analysisis with the underlying meanings and structures of interaction, in how

interaction accomplishes social work.

(e.g. being a student, being African-American, disputing a dirty

joke, giving a lecture, giving a parking ticket, conducting a news

interview, demonstrating competent knowledge ofWoWetc.)

Its through this that culture is produced at the local and witnessablelevel: interaction is culture-in-praxis. There is a difference in emphasis:

CA focuses on the process and structure of interaction,

while discourse analysis emphasises the underlyingmeanings of what was said.

Both are interested in the tacit aspects of communication. From these perspectives, there is no non-political statement.


11/18

A classic example:

1. Kid: you know whatMum?

2. Mum: What?

3. Kid:

vs

1. Kid: you know what

Mum?2. Mum: Not now Susan

Children employsequence organization

precisely in order to dealwith their problem of

having unequal rights totalk (2000: 174).

Kitzinger, Celia. 2000. Doing FeministConversation Analysis. Feminism andPsychologyvol. 10, no. 2: 163-193.


12/18

Some research areas where this kind of methodology has beenextremely successful and influential:

research on medical settings research on legal settings research on educational settings (esp. ESL education)

Some locations where this kind of methodology is being appliedonline:

Forums Chatrooms Article comments Gaming environments Blogs Social networking interaction Text messaging


13/18

Why care? Empirical analysis of online data indicates how online

environments are actually used. E.g. pro-ana and the clean feed:

yesterday, i went out to a restaurant with my boyfriend and i ended up binging at therestaurant. we split a large plate, and because i was eating so fast due to the binge Iended up eating more than my boyfriend,

he looks at me and says," You Eat A lot." And it smacked me in the head that im afucking cow who cant control herself.

And then i told him we ate the same amount, and he said no, that i ate so much more

than him and pointed out every single thing i ate.

i got soo depresssed

6 months ago before i recovered, he used to say i was too skinny and i needed to eatmore and now when i recovered he says i eat too much.

im never good enough.

And im soo fucking happy that im relapsing so i can make him hurt by beingsoo skinny so he knows its his fucking fault.


14/18

Fan communities


15/18

Market research: e.g. fan communities

How fans interact with the environment

How they interact with the product

How they interact with each other around

and through the product


16/18


17/18

Gay/ghey: chatroom play with heteronormativity/masculine identity

1. * timeheater is the only gay breakcore artist2. [Pi180] what about Duran Duran Duran3. [timeheater] no4. [timeheater] jeez i have to explain it every time5. [carn1fex] you and doormouse should have a naked tag team marathon6. [Pi180] he acts prety gay7. [BC240] so whats this ghey anyway8. [timeheater] ghey9. [diab0lik] is he gay?10.[timeheater] and gay11.[timeheater] isnt the same12.[BC240] well what is it,13.[BC240] some metrocore shit?14.[BC240] i am northcore15.[timeheater] gay is ghey but ghey isnt always gay... its like being christian.

catholics are christian but not all christians are catholic


18/18

The structure and content of interaction

Problems with CA:emphasis on structure

distinct structures of online interactions:

Multi-modality of online interaction Synchronous/Asynchronous distinction and temporal extension online Hybrid methods for hybrid envrionments: methodological triangulation etc. Context Ethical considerations

digc102 week 8 dr andrew whelan conversation analysis online

Documents