Cognition and conversation

By Jonathan Potter. 2006

91 citations recorded by the source corpus.

This article considers the different approaches to cognition in conversation analysis (CA) and discursive psychology (DP). Its points are illustrated through a critical but appreciative consideration of an article by Drew in which he uses conversation analysis to identify ‘cognitive moments’ in interaction. Problems are identified with Drew’s analysis and the conclusions he draws. In particular, he a) presupposes a dualistic division between depth and surface; b) makes circular inferences from conventional conversational patterns to underlying cognitive entities; c) presupposes (rather than demonstrates) that the underlying cognitive entities influence conduct. It is argued that none of these things is required by conversation analysis; rather Drew is imposing cognitivist assumptions on conversational materials. Discursive psychology’s approach focuses on cognitive issues in terms of how they are constructed and oriented to in interaction; its virtues are pressed.

Subfields: Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, Language and Linguistics, Literature and Literary Theory

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/d1e8296a91f1a052b5fc89edf31d8c18ed932ba1

Citations in the corpus

• The co-constitution of politeness implicature in conversation (2007, unknown): “…to indirect communication in general in work in speech act theory (Cooren, 2000, 2005; Sbisà and Fabbri, 1980; Sbisà, 1992, 2001), conversation analysis (Bilmes 1993; Heritage, 1990/91; Hopper, 2006), social psychology (Clark, 1996, 1997), and discursive psychology (Edwards, 1997; Potter, 2006).”
• Discourse, cognition and social practices: the rich surface of language and social interaction (2006, unknown): “Potter 2006].”