Confirming and Denying in Co-Construction Processes: A Case Study of an Adult with Cerebral Palsy and two Familiar Partners

Abstract

For individuals with complex communication needs, one of the most frequent communicative strategies is the co-construction of meaning with familiar partners. This preliminary single-case study gives insight into a special sequential pattern of co-construction processes - the search sequence - particularly in relation to the processes of confirming and denying meanings proposed by familiar interaction partners. Five different conversations between an adult with cerebral palsy and complex communication needs and two familiar co-participants were videotaped and analyzed using the methodology of conversation analysis (CA). The study revealed that confirmations and denials are not simply two alternative actions, but that several possibilities to realize confirmations and denials exist that differ in their frequency and that have different consequences for the sequential context. This study of confirmations and denials demonstrates that co-construction processes are more complex than have previously been documented.

Language Development of Individuals Who Require Aided Communication: Reflections on State of the Science and Future Research Directions

“…In fact, it represented a mistimed sequential relationship with an earlier turn (focused on dinner). A series of studies (Clarke et al, 2013;Clarke & Wilkinson, 2007Collins, 1996;Hornmeyer & Renner, 2013) have drawn attention to the different insights that can be gained when aided communication output is viewed, not through a structural linguistics lens, but rather as conversational moves that occur as part of a shared communication problem space, where collaboration is essential if meaning is to be progressed. In this view, the function or use of output from communication devices or communication boards is not simply an alternative expressive mode to bypass speech difficulties.…”

“…However, to maximize success, partners may also subtly plan and signal specific points in a conversation where they anticipate and are primed for a contribution encoded in the aided modality (Clarke & Wilkinson, 2007). Individuals using aided communication may likewise develop nuanced Running head: LANGUAGE DEVELOPMENT AND AIDED COMMUNICATION 23 strategies to signal transfer of speaker turn, (Clarke, Bloch, & Wilkinson, 2013) or assign specific roles within conversation to the aided mode (Hornmeyer & Renner, 2013) Even if an utterance is intelligible, however, it may not be easily understood. In order to understand an utterance in conversation, a listener has to understand not just the words and the grammar but also how that utterance fits and what it means in terms of the interaction up to that point.…”

Estratégias de Comunicadores Auxiliados para Instruir Parceiros de Comunicação na Construção de Modelos Físicos

“…Às vezes, como pode ser visto no exemplo 3, o comunicador auxiliado usou uma estratégia em que ele combinou o uso de símbolos gráficos e gestos para expressar-se e o parceiro de comunicação teve que co-produzir, interpretar e traduzir o significado do enunciado, a fim de completar a tarefa. Durante a solução da tarefa, o parceiro de comunicação entendeu as estratégias utilizadas pelo comunicador auxiliado (HÖRMEYER;RENNER, 2013;BREKKE;VON TETZCHNER, 2003).…”

Innovations for Supporting Communication: Opportunities and Challenges for People with Complex Communication Needs

“…The conventional use of eye gaze to regulate interactions, to signal possible speaker transition points, and to provide feedback to a speaker, must accommodate to the additional demands of using eye gaze as part of an articulation process. Even expert users of aided communication rely heavily on unaided modes of communication within interactions [35] and often demonstrate great skill in switching between use of eye gaze to regulate an interaction, to using it to point to referents within the environment, including the aided communication device [36], and/or to signal an intent to construct an utterance using that device, all the while attending to the device while they select the target utterance, and monitoring their partner’s communication behavior [37]. The taxing demands of eye gaze technology create further new complexities that impact on all participants within interactions.…”