Communicative Practices

Hanks, William F.

doi:10.4324/9780429493522-12

Cited by 40 publications

(46 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The roles of the participants, a phenomenon described by Goffman as "footing" [19], and how these roles might shift during social interaction are particularly important for understanding spoken discourse [25,27]. At the core of these roles are those of the speaker and the addressee [11].…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Footing in human-robot conversations

Mutlu

Shiwa²,

Kanda³

et al. 2009

Proceedings of the 4th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human Robot Interaction

275

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

During conversations, speakers establish their and others' participant roles (who participates in the conversation and in what capacity)-or "footing" as termed by Goffman-using gaze cues. In this paper, we study how a robot can establish the participant roles of its conversational partners using these cues. We designed a set of gaze behaviors for Robovie to signal three kinds of participant roles: addressee, bystander, and overhearer. We evaluated our design in a controlled laboratory experiment with 72 subjects in 36 trials. In three conditions, the robot signaled to two subjects, only by means of gaze, the roles of (1) two addressees, (2) an addressee and a bystander, or (3) an addressee and an overhearer. Behavioral measures showed that subjects' participation behavior conformed to the roles that the robot communicated to them. In subjective evaluations, significant differences were observed in feelings of groupness between addressees and others and liking between overhearers and others. Participation in the conversation did not affect task performancemeasured by recall of information presented by the robot-but affected subjects' ratings of how much they attended to the task.While Aiko and Robovie talk about how to get to the Muji store, another shopper, Yukio, approaches Robovie's booth. Yukio wants to get a program of this month's shows at the amphitheater. When Yukio approaches the information booth, Robovie acknowledges Yukio's presence with a short glance, but turns back to Aiko, signaling to Yukio that he has to wait until its conversation with Aiko is over and to Aiko that it is attending to her.This scenario differs with the addition of a non-participant [11] into the social situation who is playing the role of a bystander [19].After Robovie's conversation with Yukio is over, a couple, Katsu and Mari, approach the booth, inquiring about Korean restaurants. Robovie asks the couple a few questions on their dining preferences and leads them to a suitable restaurant.

show abstract

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Footing in human-robot conversations

Mutlu

Shiwa²,

Kanda³

et al. 2009

Proceedings of the 4th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human Robot Interaction

275

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Does it involve the mobilization of a single prominent feature or the wholesale recruitment of a cluster of features? Once typification has already taken place, one can presumably compare features from the persona or frame of reference that is invoked, in phenomenological terms (Eisenlohr 2008; Hanks 1996; Schutz 1970), to those in the evolving staging to answer the latter question. But what about newly emerging personae, those that are perhaps not already recognized as variables co‐occurring in a specific style or stance?…”

Section: Typificationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Introduction: The Multiple Voices of Jane Hill1

Roth‐Gordon

Mendoza‐Denton

2011

Journal of Linguistic Anthropology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Goodwin, 1981;Gumperz, 1992;Kress, 1996;Kress & van Leeuwen, 1996). The sociocultural aspect refers to the personal, social, and cultural knowledge, feelings, and identities (cognition, affect, and identity are all equally important here) relevant in the interaction, including sociocultural knowl edge about sign systems, activities, and the material world (i.e., all of the other aspects just described) (e.g., Gee, 1992Gee, , 1996Gumperz, 1982aGumperz, , 1982bHanks, 1995;John-Steiner, Panofsky, & Smith, 1994;Palmer, 1996;Scollon & Scollon, 1981;Sperber & Wilson, 1986;Spradley, 1980;Toolan, 1996;Ungerer & Schmid, 1996;Volosinov, 1973). These four aspects constitute the MASS system.…”

Section: The Mass Systemmentioning

confidence: 99%

Chapter 4: Discourse Analysis, Learning, and Social Practice: A Methodological Study

Gee

Green

1998

Review of Research in Education

258

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the past two decades, the study of discourse has become an important theoretical perspective for those concerned with the study of learning in social settings. Discourse analysis approaches have been developed to examine ways in which knowledge is socially constructed in classrooms and other educational settings. By studying discursive activity within classrooms and other social settings, researchers have provided new insights into the complex and dynamic relationships among discourse, social practices, and learning. Specifically, this body of work has provided understandings of the ways in which opportunities for learning are constructed across time, groups, and events; how knowledge constructed in classrooms (and other educational settings) shapes, and is shaped by, the discursive activity and social practices of members; patterns of practice simultaneosuly support and constrain access to the academic content of the "official" curriculum; and how opportunities for learning are influenced by the actions of actors beyond classroom settings (e.g., school districts, book publishers, curriculum developers, legislators, and community members) (for recent syntheses and conceptual analyses, see Hicks, 1995;Luke, 1995).Discourse analysis approaches used to examine such educational issues draw on discourse theories and methods developed in other disciplines (e.g., applied linguistics, law, literary studies, psychology, sociolinguistics, and sociology, among others) (see van Dijk, 1985, for a comprehensive look at the issue of discourse theory and method across disciplines, including education). However, educational researchers have not merely taken up and applied existing approaches. They have also contributed to the development of discourse theories and methods as they have adopted and adapted existing approaches and constructed new approaches to address questions of importance to education as a discipline. 2 Given the complex and continuing nature of life in classrooms and other educational settings, educational researchers often combine discourse analysis with ethnographic approaches to examine questions of what counts as learning in a local setting, how and when learning occurs, and how what is learned at one point in time becomes a sociocultural resource for future learning for both the group and the individual. Through this combined approach, educational researchers are able to examine how educational processes and practices are constructed across time by 119 at UNIV OF RHODE ISLAND LIBRARY on April 4, 2015 http://rre.aera.net Downloaded from

show abstract

Communicative Practices

Cited by 40 publications

References 0 publications

Footing in human-robot conversations

Footing in human-robot conversations

Introduction: The Multiple Voices of Jane Hill1

Chapter 4: Discourse Analysis, Learning, and Social Practice: A Methodological Study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About