Communication 465: Conversational Interaction
Wayne A. Beach
Professor, School of Communication
COM 201A; 619-594-4948
Office Hours: T, 1:30-2:00 & Th, 1:30-3:00 (and by appointment)
wbeach@mail.sdsu.edu
Adjunct Professor, Department of Surgery
Member, Moores Cancer Center
University of California, San Diego
http://psfa.sdsu.edu/faculty.php
School of Communication Website: http://communication.sdsu.edu/
http://www.kpbs.org/news/2013/apr/10/cancer-play-reality-theatre/
http://www.ucsd.tv/search-details.aspx?showID=25956
Learning Objectives
The six learning objectives for this class are:
1) To introduce students to the research method “Conversation Analysis (CA)”: A resource
for observing, describing, and explaining the detailed organization of everyday
communication in systematic and powerful ways.
2) To illustrate how CA might be employed to closely examine diverse ordinary
conversations comprising daily living.
3) To better understand a primary social problem in contemporary society – how family
members communicate about cancer on the telephone, in their home environments – which is
exceedingly common, yet largely taken for granted as a set of interactional practices and
achievements.
4) To increase knowledge about how basic knowledge about family cancer phone calls
might become integrated with the Arts – a project entitled Conversations about Cancer
1
(CAC), including a theatrical production entitled When Cancer Calls... – and how basic
research can receive national funding to make a positive change in the world.
5) To enhance skills for disseminating When Cancer Calls…, and for assessing the impacts
these performances (both live and through DVD screenings) might have on diverse
audiences.
6) To envision possible educational applications of CAC for improving communication
skills among cancer patients, family members, and medical professionals.
Examples of Special Class Activities




Describing and discussing the fundamental assumptions of Conversation Analysis
(CA) as one of the most prominent social scientific methodologies
Listening to and analyzing actual family phone call recordings and transcriptions
Inviting to class any family members, friends, or health professionals whose lives
have been impacted by cancer (or other health challenges)
Viewing and responding to excerpts from a nationally disseminated video
production, When Cancer Calls…, which is adapted from real phone conversations in
the Malignancy phone call corpus.
Course Background and Description
The materials for this class are comprised of a sampling of phone calls in the San Diego
Conversation Library (SDCL) entitled "The Malignancy Series" – a corpus of 61 recorded
and transcribed conversations, over a 13 month period, involving family members who
have been informed that their mother's tumor has been diagnosed as "malignant". The calls
begin with dad "delivering the news" to son and ongoing conversations with other family
members (including the mom/patient), friends, and service providers as the cancer
develops.
This study is the first natural history, in the social and medical sciences, of a family talking
through cancer from initial diagnosis until death of a loved one. This investigation was
initially funded by the American Cancer Society under the title “Conversations about
cancer: Understanding how families talk through illness” (#ROG-98-172-01). Two
subsequent and ongoing projects, “Conversations about cancer: A theatrical production” (#
1R41CA144235-01A1; #2 R42 CA144235-02) have been funded by the National Institutes of
Health/National Cancer Institute.
2
After more than a decade of research on these materials, a book emerged entitled A Natural
History of Family Cancer: Interactional Resources for Managing Illness (Hampton Press, 2009):
The book was awarded the 2010-2011 Outstanding Book Award from the National
Communication Association (Health Communication Division), as well as the 2010-2011
Outstanding Scholarship Award (Language & Social Interaction Division).
Book Description
A family. A phone call. A diagnosis...One family’s journey through cancer.
Family members and cancer patients routinely talk about and through cancer on the
telephone. Yet little is known about the social organization of these conversations and
how cancer diagnosis, treatment, and prognosis impact everyday living. The
culmination of a decade of research, this volume offers close examination of the first
natural history of one family’s 13 month journey through a wife/mother/sister’s
terminal cancer. Analysis of these family phone recordings (and transcriptions) offers
primal insights about the fundamental importance of communication, and how family
members rely on one another when navigating through complex social, emotional,
technical, and biomedical concerns associated with cancer: Updating and assessing
emerging news, being stoic, claiming and defending knowledge, reporting and
responding to ongoing troubles, making airline reservations, adjusting to stable yet
ambiguous health circumstances, displaying frustration, commiserating, maintaining a
‘state of readiness’, evaluating doctors and medical care, telling and retelling stories,
being humorous and playful, and constructing hope as an alternative to despair. These
interactions reveal no small measures of personal challenges, emotional turmoil,
humorous exchanges, endearing actions, and resolute efforts to remain hopeful in the
progressive face of bad cancer news.
Moments such as these are extraordinary and mundane...foreign yet strikingly familiar
3
to all who have encountered them when matters of illness, disease, life, and death move
to the forefront and require our attention. Readers will not only gain enhanced
understandings of ordinary human interactions, but a deep appreciation for managing
the trials, tribulations, hopes and triumphs of cancer – and all human illness journeys
shaped by communication in everyday life.
Conversations about Cancer (CAC): When Cancer Calls…
Basic communication research has identified a major social problem: Communicating about
cancer from diagnosis through death of a loved one. Over the past decade, an investigation
into how family members talk through cancer on the telephone has been transformed into a
theatrical production entitled Conversations about Cancer (CAC): All dialogue in When Cancer
Calls… is drawn from naturally occurring (transcribed) interactions between family members
as they navigate their way through the trials, tribulations, hopes and triumphs of a cancer
journey. This dramatic performance explicitly acknowledges the power of the arts as an
exceptional learning tool for extending empirical research, exploring ordinary family life, and
exposing often taken-for-granted conceptions of health and illness. We assesses the feasibility
of educating and impacting cancer patients, family members, and medical professionals who
viewed When Cancer Calls… as a live performance and through DVD screenings. Pre-post
survey measures were created to solicit audience feedback, talkback sessions occurred
following viewings, and selected audience members participated in focus-group meetings.
Survey results are reported that demonstrate unequivocal and positive impacts for changing
opinions about the perceived importance, and attributed significance, of family
communication in the midst of cancer. Implications are raised about ongoing efforts to design
and implement a national effectiveness trial, and future applications of the CAC program for
advancing research, education, and training across diverse academic and health care
professions.
4
Three Phases for this Course
The semester will be organized into three class phases. An overview of each phase is described
below. (See also ‘Grading & Evaluation”, below.)
All paper handouts are listed under Assignments on Blackboard.
1. Overview of CA: Sample Analysis of Family Phone Calls & Transcriptions
While some class activities will involve lectures and discussions on extant literature,
primary attention will be given to “informal data/listening sessions” – repeated, rigorous,
and grounded attempts to identify and substantiate patterns of human conduct-ininteraction. Analysis of naturally occurring phone calls, through repeated listenings and in
unison with transcriptions, yields a rich understanding of the primary interactional
patterns employed by family members when working through the trials and tribulations of
cancer – and a host of other interesting phenomena. Emphasis will be given to close
examinations of single instances as well as analysis of "collections" of interactional
phenomena. (See Appendix A – Transcription Symbols, and Appendix B – Adjacency
Pairs).
Group Project #1 will focus on analyzing selected moments from these cancer calls, and
writing a paper identifying communication patterns and findings (see below).
2. Analyzing How Family Members Tell and Receive ‘Stories’
Storytelling is one of the most prominent activities in everyday living. We will examine
how stories are organized in interaction, and apply these learnings to a series of stories
during the family phone calls.
Group Project #2 will integrate key literature and quotes on storytelling when analyzing
selected moments between family members.
3. More Key Social Actions: ‘Sharing Commiserative Space’, Hope, and Other Practices
More and related key social actions, including how family members commiserate and share
hope with one another, will be closely examined.
5
Group Project #3 will provide groups with several research options.
Blackboard & Text(s)
As described above, the primary text for this class is:
Beach, W.A. (2009). A natural history of family cancer: Interactional resources for managing
illness. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press, Inc.
This book is required reading for this course, and is available at the Aztecs Bookstore. I
may also forward additional PDF’s to class participants as the semester progresses.
Availability of additional readings will be discussed in class.
The syllabus, assignments (written and digitized audio/video clips), data handouts, and
related materials are available on SDSU’s Blackboard.
An overview of my research activities is available at:
http://advancement.sdsu.edu/marcomm/features/2008/cancer.html
Downloaded PDF’s from my website are available at:
http://www.rohan.sdsu.edu/~wbeach/index.htm
Media files may be downloaded from Blackboard and:
http://www-rohan.sdsu.edu/~wbeach/media/
Appendices A & B (below) describe “Transcription Symbols” and “Adjacency Pairs”.
Grading & Evaluation:
Students not attending the first or second classes of the semester will have 25 points (for
each day) deducted from their final/total score for the semester.
Midterm Exam
Group Project #1
Group Project #2
Group Project #3
Final Exam
Exercise Points
100 points
100 points
100 points
100 points
100 points
100 points
6
---------600 points total
(90% = 540; 80% = 480; 70 % = 420; 60% =360)
Academic Dishonesty Policy
The Academic Dishonesty Policy for the School of Communication is located on
Blackboard.
Overview of Midterm & Final Exams, Group Projects, & Exercise Points
The Midterm & Final Exams (100 points each) will be comprised of a series of multiple
choice items drawn from readings, lectures, and excerpts of human interaction (recorded
and transcribed). A variety of exam items will be based on analysis of provided
data/transcriptions, analyzed in class and/or readings. Students will be required to read,
inspect, and respond to questions about these data excerpts. Exams in this class will not be
returned. However, you are welcome to make an appointment to see and review your
exam. All exams will be destroyed at the end of the following semester.
Group Project #1 (100 points) involves the following steps (see also handout on
Blackboard)
1) Go to BB (within Course Documents/Digital Media Files). Select and listen to any of the
‘Malignancy’ recordings, in unison with the Malignancy transcriptions (in Course
Documents). Next, identify a 2-3 page excerpt (length can be negotiated) that you
find interesting, compelling, and merits further analysis.
2) Closely analyze these moments. Write-up your preliminary insights and findings.
3) Based on these insights and findings, read through the ‘Subject Index’ in Natural History
to identify relevant materials in the book. Identify key topics/social actions that are
analyzed at different places/chapters in the book (e.g., delivering/receiving good/bad
news, managing uncertainty, reporting about doctors, claiming epistemic
knowledge, commiseration, hope).
4) Compare and contrast these moments/actions with what you have discovered in the
Maligancy recordings and transcriptions. (i.e., build a small collection of instances
to make your case). The number of instances can vary across groups,
and will be discussed in class.
5) Write a short (15 pages maximum, double space, 12 font) paper which a) integrates key
literature/quotes, b) overviews and analyses these moments, c) describes their
significance in managing family cancer, and d) raises key issues about how
understandings of these moments both 1) advances research and 2) might be utilized
7
to improve how cancer patients, family members, and medical experts might talk
through cancer journeys.
Group Project #2 (100 points) and Group Project #3 will be described in further detail as
the class unfolds.
Group Involvement
All group members should invest (for all practical purposes) equivalent efforts when
producing group projects. Should individual group members fail to complete their
assigned tasks, groups will be instructed as follows: 1) Inform the member (by email and
face-to-face) that they are not fulfilling their obligations; 2) If lack of effort continues, warn
the individual that should they continue to not do adequate work, they will a) inform Dr.
Beach that the individual is dropped from the group, and b) meet with him to discuss this
unfortunate outcome. That person will be told that they are no longer in the group, and
have the option to either complete the project alone or receive a zero for the assignment.
Exercise Points
In order to understand how to analyze data excerpts of human interaction, regular and
prompt attendance to classes is necessary. Prior students will attest to the fact that this is
not a typical lecture course, where students can simply gain “lecture notes” from others
and read materials independently in order to write papers and take exams.
Classes will be devoted to a) data sessions directly related to the analytic papers, and b)
discussions of relevant literature/studies. Thus, you are strongly encouraged to come to
class expecting that each day will facilitate your independent analytic and writing efforts,
skills which you will need as a contributing research member of your teams.
To encourage regular attendance and participation, on a random basis students will be
asked to form into groups and engage in various exercises (which will vary, including
critical examinations of literature, detailed analyses of data, responses to watching videos,
etc.). If you are in attendance that day, and participate in the exercise that is assigned, you will be
assigned a full 10 points for your engagement and commitment to class. There will be 10 Exercises
throughout the semester – allowing each student, with perfect attendance, to receive 100
total Exercise Points to enhance their final grade. Thus, 1 Exercise absence = 90 points, 2
absences = 80 points, etc.
Exercise Points will be given for attending the last class during Final Exam week.
8
The task of the modern educator is not to cut down jungles but to irrigate deserts.
C.S. Lewis, 1947
Beach/COMM 465: Conversational Interaction
(Preliminary Topics/Readings)
I.
A.
COMMUNICATION, INTERACTION, & FAMILY CANCER
Overview & Introduction
Book Reviews (back cover and front of book), Foreword (by Douglas M. Maynard),
and Introduction in Natural History
Wayne A. Beach (2007). Understanding how family members talk through
cancer. In B. Whaley and W. Sampter (Eds.), Advancements in
communication theory & research (330-350). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
(pdf/Blackboard)
B.
Communication, Cancer, and Family Interactions
Chapter 1, “Communication and Family Cancer Journeys”, in Natural History
C.
Overview & Perspectives: Psychosocial Research in ‘Family’ Cancer
Linda J. Kristjanson & Terri Ashcroft (1994). The family’s cancer journey: A
literature review. Cancer Nursing, 17, 1-17. (pdf/e-mail)
J. Michael Gotcher (1993). The effects of family communication on psychosocial
adjustment of cancer patients. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 21,
176-188. (pdf/Blackboard)
D.
The “Malignancy” Phone Calls & Fundamental Assumptions of CA Research
9
Chapter 2, “The Malignancy Phone Call Corpus: Analyzing Episodic and
Longitudinal Interactions”, in Natural History
Beach, W.A. (2013). Conversation analysis in communication. In J. Sidnell & T.
Stivers (Eds.), Handbook of conversation analysis (674-687). Cambridge:
Blackwell-Wiley.
II. INITIAL CONVERSATIONS ABOUT MOM’S DIAGNOSIS
E.
Chapter 3, “Between Dad and Son: Delivering, Receiving, and Assimilating
Bad Cancer News”, in Natural History
Chapter 4, “Between Mom and Son: Talking About “The Verdict”, in
Natural History
F.
The Delivery and Reception of “Good and Bad News”
Douglas W. Maynard (1996). On “realization” in everyday life: The forecasting of
bad news as a social relation. American Sociological Review, 61, 109-131.
(pdf/Blackboard)
Douglas W. Maynard (1997). The news delivery sequence: Bad news and good news
in conversational interaction. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 30,
93-130. (pdf/Blackboard)
III. MANAGING LIFE IN TIMES OF UNCERTAINTY AND CRISIS
G.
Chapter 5, “Making the Case for Airline Compassion Fares: The Serial Organization
of Problem Narratives”, in Natural History
Chapter 6, “Stability and Ambiguity: Living in Flux with Mom’s Cancer”,
in Natural History
Chapter 7, “State of Readiness: Figurative Expressions and the Social
Construction of Emergency Preparedness,” in Natural History
[See Story Readings on Blackboard...to be discussed in class]
10
H.
Uncertainty and Illness
Babrow, A. S., Kasch, C. R., & Ford, L. A. (1998). The many meanings of
uncertainty in illness: Toward a systematic accounting. Health Communication,
10, 1-23. (pdf/Blackboard)
IV. REPORTING ON AND ASSESSING MEDICAL CARE
I.
Chapter 8, “So What’s the Doctor Have to Say”: Lay Reportings about Doctors,
Medical Staff, and Technical Procedures”, in Natural History
Chapter 9, “She Likes the Doctor…Ho:ly Christ Come On”: Positive and
Negative Assessments of Doctors and Medical Care”, in Natural
History
V. ENDURING AND ENDEARING MOMENTS ACROSS CALLS
J.
Chapter 10, “Sh:i:t…Yeah $I Know.$”: Sharing Commiserative Space and
Claiming Epistemic Authority”, in Natural History
Chapter 11, “Stories-in-a-Series: Tellings and Retellings about Cigarettes,
Devastation, and Hair”, in Natural History
Chapter 12, “Social, Scientific, and Spiritual Conceptions of Hope (and
Optimism)”, in Natural History
Chapter 13, “Well Where’s Our Magic Wand Mom…Beats the Hell Out of
Me: The Interactional Organization of Hope and Optimism”,
in Natural History
11
K.
Alternative Examinations of Hope and Optimism
Elisabeth Kubler-Ross (1969). Hope (Ch.13, pp.138-156). In On death and
dying. New York:Macmillan Publishing Co., Inc. (in 1969 book only)
Anssi Perakyla (1991). Hope work in the care of seriously ill patients. Qualitative
Health Research, 1, 407-433. (pdf/Blackboard)
Elizabeth Holt (1993). The structure of death announcements: Looking on the bright
side of death. Text, 13, 189-212. (pdf/Blackboard)
VI. PAST, PRESENT AND FUTURE PERSPECTIVES
L.
Chapter 14, “Epilogue: Journeying Through Cancer Interactionally”, in
Natural History
Chapter 15, “Retrospective Interview with Family Members: Eighteen
Years Following Diagnosis”, in Natural History
VII. CONVERSATIONS ABOUT CANCER (CAC):
A THEATRICAL PRODUCTION
M.
Beach, W.A., Buller, M.K., Dozier, D. et al., (2012). Conversations about cancer
(CAC): Assessing feasibility and audience impacts from viewing The
Cancer Play. Health Communication, 29, 462-472.
Beach, W.A., Dozier, D.M., Buller, M.K., Gutzmer, K., Fluharty, L., Myers, V. H.,
& Buller, D. (2015/submitted). The Conversations about cancer (CAC)
project – Phase II: National findings from a randomized control trial.
Beach, W.A., Gutzmer, K., Dozier, D., Buller, M.K., & Buller, D. (2014).
Conversations about Cancer (CAC): A global strategy for accessing
naturally occurring family interactions. In D.K. Kim, A. Singhal, & G.
12
Kreps (Eds.). Global health communication strategies in the 21st century:
Design, implementation, and evaluation (101-117). Peter Lange Publishing
Group.
Beach, W.A., Gutzmer, K., Dozier, D. (in press). Family conversations about in-home
and hospice care: From discovery to creation of an effective health intervention
and campaign. In Wittenberg-Lyles, E., Ferrell, B., Goldsmith, J., Smith, T.,
Ragan, S., Glajchen, M., & Handzo, G. (Eds). Textbook of palliative care
communication. NewYork: Oxford University Press.
[More readings may be assigned at a later date.]
Sampling of Related Readings
Social Aspects of Illness, Death, & Dying
David Sudnow (1967). Introduction (pp.1-11); On bad news (Ch.5, pp.117-152). In
Passing on: The social organization of dying. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: PrenticeHall, Inc. (pdf/e-mail)
Elisabeth Kubler-Ross (1969). Attitudes toward death and dying (Chp. 2, pp.1137.). In On death and dying. New York: Macmillan Publishing Co., Inc.
(pdf/e-mail)
The Noticeable Absence of Interactional Research
Beach, W.A. (2001). Introduction: Diagnosing lay diagnosis. Text, 21, 13-18. (wb
website)
Irving Rootman & Larry Hershfield (1994). Health communication research:
Broadening the scope. Health Communication, 6, 69-72. (pdf/e-mail)
Selected Other Readings
Wayne A. Beach (1996). Editor’s Preface and Introduction (pp.ix-xvii); Finding
bulimia (Ch.1, pp.1-19); Interaction and social problems (Ch.5, pp.101-112).
In Conversations about illness: Family preoccupations with bulimia. Mahwah,
NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
13
Wayne A. Beach (1995). Preserving and constraining options: “Okays” and `official’
priorities in medical interviews. In G.H. Morris & R. Cheneil (Eds.). The talk
of the clinic: Explorations in the analysis of medical and therapeutic discourse
(pp.259-289). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc
Jorg R. Bergmann (1992). Veiled morality: Notes on discretion in psychiatry. In Drew
& Heritage (Eds.), Talk at work: Interaction in institutional settings (pp.137162). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Graham Button & Neil Casey (1984). Generating topic: The use of topic initial
elicitors. In J. Maxwell Atkinson & John Heritage (Eds.), Structures of social
action: Studies in conversation analysis (pp.167-190). Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Graham Button & Neil Casey (1988/89). Topic initiation: Business-at-hand. Research on
Language and Social Interaction, 22: 61-92.
Paul Drew and John Heritage (1992). Analyzing talk at work: An introduction. In Paul
Drew & John Heritage (Eds.), Talk at Work: Interaction in Institutional Settings
(pp.3-65). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Jean-Francois Duval (July, 1997). Elisabeth Kubler-Ross: The final stage. Shambala Sun,
Arthur W. Frank (1969). The wounded storyteller: Body, illness, and ethics. Chicago:
The University of Chicago Press.
Richard M. Frankel (1995). Some answers about questions in clinical interviews. In
G.H. Morris & R. Cheneil (Eds.). The talk of the clinic: Explorations in the
analysis of medical and therapeutic discourse (pp.233-258). Hillsdale, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
J. Michael Gotcher (1995). Well-adjusted and maladjusted cancer patients: An
examination of communication variables. Health Communication, 7, 21-33.
Jay F. Gubrium & James A. Holstein (1990).What is family? & A new perspective:
Social constructivism (Chps. 1 & 2, pp.1-34). What is family? Mountain View,
CA: Mayfield Publishing Company.
Christian Heath (1992). The delivery and reception of diagnosis in the general-practice
consultation. In Paul Drew & John Heritage (Eds.), Talk at work: Interaction in
institutional settings (pp.235-267). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
John Heritage & Sue Sefi (1992). Dilemmas of advice: Aspects of the delivery and
reception of advice in interactions between health visitors and first-time mothers.
In Paul Drew & John Heritage (Eds.), Talk at Work: Interaction in Institutional
Settings (pp.359-417). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Gail Jefferson (1984a). On stepwise transition from talk about a trouble to
inappropriately next-positioned matters. In J. Maxwell Atkinson & John Heritage
(Eds.), Structures of social action: Studies in conversation analysis (pp.191-222).
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
14
Gail Jefferson (1984b). On the organization of laughter in talk about troubles. In J.
Maxwell Atkinson & John Heritage (Eds.), Structures of social action: Studies in
conversation analysis (pp.346-369). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Charlotte M. Jones & Wayne A. Beach (1995). Therapists’ techniques for responding to
unsolicited contributions by family members. In G.H. Morris & R. Cheneil (Eds.).
The talk of the clinic: Explorations in the analysis of medical and therapeutic
discourse (pp.49-70). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Charlotte M. Jones & Wayne A. Beach (in press). “I just wanna know why”: Patients’
attempts and doctors’ responses to premature solicitation of diagnostic
information. To appear in Madeline Maxwell (Ed.), Diagnosis as Cultural
Practice, Mouton de Gruyter Publishers (2002).
Don Lattan (July, 1997). Second thoughts. San Francisco Chronicle.
Karen Lutfey & Douglas W. Maynard (1998). Bad news in an oncology setting: How a
physician talks about death and dying without using those words. Social
Psychology Quarterly, 61, 321-341.
Douglas W. Maynard (1988). Language, interaction, and social problems. Social
Problems, 35, 311-334.
Douglas W. Maynard (1992). On clinicians co-implicating recipients' perspective in the
delivery of diagnostic news. In Drew & Heritage (Eds.), Talk at work: Interaction
in institutional settings (pp.331-358). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Douglas W. Maynard & Richard M. Frankel (in press). On the edge of rationality in
primary care medicine: Bad news, good news, and uncertainty. In John Heritage
& Douglas W. Maynard (Eds.), Practicing medicine: Structures and process
in primary care encounters. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Anssi Perakyla (1993). Invoking a hostile world: Discussing the patient’s future in AIDS
counseling. Text, 13, 302-338.
Anita M. Pomerantz (1984). Giving a source or basis: The practice in conversation of
telling `how I know'. Journal of Pragmatics, 8:607-625.
Emanuel A. Schegloff (1988). On an actual virtual servo-mechanism for guessing bad
news: A single-case conjecture. Social Problems, 35: 442-457.
15
Appendix A: Transcription Symbols
The transcription notation system employed for data segments is an adaptation of Gail Jefferson's
work (see Atkinson & Heritage (Eds.), 1984, pp.ix-xvi; Beach (Ed.), 1989, pp.89-90). The symbols may
be described as follows:
:
Colon(s): Extended or stretched sound, syllable, or word.
Underlining: Vocalic emphasis.
(.)
Micropause: Brief pause of less than (0.2).
(1.2)
Timed Pause: Intervals occuring within and between same or
different speaker's utterance.
(( ))
Double Parentheses: Scenic details.
( )
Single Parentheses: Transcriptionist doubt.
.
Period: Falling vocal pitch.
?
Question Marks: Rising vocal pitch.

Arrows: Pitch resets; marked rising and falling shifts
in intonation.
° °
Degree Signs: A passage of talk noticeably softer than
surrounding talk.
=
Equal Signs: Latching of contiguous utterances, with
no interval or overlap.
[ ]
Brackets: Speech overlap.
[[
Double Brackets: Simultaneous speech orientations to
prior turn.
!
Exclamation Points: Animated speech tone.
Hyphens: Halting, abrupt cut off of sound or word.
> <
Less Than/Greater Than Signs: Portions of an
utterance delivered at a pace noticeably quicker
than surrounding talk.
OKAY CAPS: Extreme loudness compared with surrounding talk.
hhh .hhh H’s: Audible outbreaths, possibly laughter. The more h’s,
the longer the aspiration. Aspirations with periods indicate audible inbreaths
(e.g., .hhh). H’s within (e.g., ye(hh)s)
parentheses mark within-speech aspirations, possible laughter
pt
Lip Smack: Often preceding an inbreath.
hah heh hoh Laugh Syllable: Relative closed or open position of laughter
$
Smile Voice: Laughing/chuckling voice while talking
16
Appendix B
Adjacency Pairs & Sequential Organization
The ‘adjacency pair’ is the fundamental building block of all
human, social understanding
(Harvey Sacks, Lectures on Conversation)
Overview






Focus is on how speakers construct, place, and participate within sequences of
practical action
Participants orient to the turn-within-sequence character of utterances-in-context –
the very basis of social understanding
Every utterance occurs within some structurally defined place in talk-in-interaction
Generally, a speaker’s turn-at-talk will be heard as directed to a prior speaker’s turnat-talk
Producers of turns will be heard as displaying an analysis of what prior speaker
was heard and understood to be doing – treating as meaningful not just any, but
particular understandings of achieved social actions
Speaking proposes a here-and-now definition of the situation, to which subsequent
talk will be oriented to
Sequential Organization of Turns


A current turn projects a relevant next action, or range of actions, to be
accomplished by another speaker in next turn
Sequential Implicativeness: Projection of a relevant next action may be accomplished
by the production of the first pair-part of an adjacency pair structure:
1st Pair Part
2nd Pair Part



Some current “first” action projects some appropriate “second/next” action
Next speaker’s response displays Conditional Relevance: Not just any, but particular
actions were projected by speaker’s prior turn-at-talk – i.e., a second action is “due”
Recipient’s uptake displays their hearings and understandings of what prior speaker
made available and relevant – and in response, can produce actions such as
agreeing, disagreeing, avoiding/evading, withholding, etc.
17
Basic Examples of Adjacency Pairs:
1st PP Greeting
2nd PP Reciprocal Greeting (or Withholding)
1st PP Question
2nd PP Answer (or Second Question)
1st PP Invitation
2nd PP Acceptance/Rejection
Conclusions




Both first and second/next speakers deal in systematically organized ways with
whatever actions are co-produced
Utterances cannot be understood in isolation of surrounding actions, or through
“literal meanings” – i.e., as “stripped” from its local context
“Context” is built in and through utterances and actions – not separated apart from
sequential organization
Communicative action is doubly contextual:
Context Renewing
Context Shaping

Thus, three fundamental assumptions:
1) Interaction is structurally organized
2) Contributions to interaction are contextually oriented
3) No order of detail can be dismissed, a priori, as
disorderly, accidental, or irrelevant
18
Classroom Comportment
The School of Communication, as a representative of SDSU and higher education,
expects students to engage in behaviors enhancing classroom learning environments.
The Instructor is responsible for optimizing learning not only for individual students,
but for all students comprising a class. Behaviors disruptive to the classroom instruction
are thus not tolerated. Among the actions that are considered disruptive to the learning
environment are:

The use of cell phones, and/or computers/laptops/tablets, not directly related to
the course and its instructional objectives, materials, or contents (e.g., using
social media or Facebook for conversation, correspondence, emailing, texting,
tweeting, or other activities).

Conversations with other students, during class lectures and related activities,
that are distracting to shared attention and collaborative learning.

Reading, sleeping, harassing, bullying, or related activities exhibiting disrespect
to the instructor or fellow students.

Consistently entering late, leaving early, or leaving often from class.

Activities that are grossly inappropriate, threatening or dangerous.
When students’ actions distract from learning objectives, instructors may be required to
intervene to minimize disruptive conduct. For example, if a student is observed texting
in class, Instructor may request that the cell phone be turned in for the remainder of
class. Or if a student is using a laptop to access Facebook or e-mail, Instructor may ask
the student to close the technology until the end of class. Each Instructor will clearly
describe and enforce these inappropriate behaviors.
Should repeat offenses occur, with fair warning, each Instructor will determine fair and
appropriate consequences for these disruptive behaviors. Should an emergency occur or
require monitoring, or if students observe violations of these policies distracting to their
learning, they are encouraged to inform the instructor as soon as possible.
Certain other activities may be acceptable, but only with permission or by direction of
the Instructor. Such activities include:
 Filming, taping, or otherwise recording the class;
 Accessing the Internet to elaborate or clarify class content;
 Requesting that computers/laptops/tablets may be permitted. If a student is
found to be surfing the net unrelated to classes, for example, they will be asked
19
to be seated in the front row(s) of the classroom when using their laptop.
Students with Disabilities
If you are a student with a disability and believe you will need accommodations for this
class, it is your responsibility to contact Student Disability Services at (619) 594-6473. To
avoid any delay in the receipt of your accommodations, you should contact Student
Disability Services as soon as possible. Please note that accommodations are not
retroactive, and that accommodations based upon disability cannot be provided until you
have presented your instructor with an accommodation letter from Student Disability
Services. Your cooperation is appreciated.
N O T E S
20