A preference for progressivity in interaction

By Tanya Stivers, Jeffrey D. Robinson. Language in society, 2006

436 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Language and Linguistics, Literature and Literary Theory, Human-Computer Interaction

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/f4e033bbbd72651e8eeafde7bee6629143e5de6b

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Language and Linguistics

In Literature and Literary Theory

In Human-Computer Interaction

Citations in the corpus

Responses to Wh-Questions in English Conversation (2010, background): “During this time, the third housemate, Jennifer, responds with Girl was eating spaghetti at two o’clock in the morning (see Stivers and Robinson 2006 for a discussion of responses by nonselected recipients).”
Epistemic search sequences in peer interaction in a content-based language classroom (2015, background): “…in the sense that, unlike knowing answers, they are actions which fulfil the technical requirements presented by a FPP information request but they do not further the progress of the informationseeking activity (Heritage and Raymond 2005; Keevallik 2011; Stivers and Robinson 2006: 371).”
The epistemics of student problems: Explaining mathematics in a multi-lingual class (2012, background): “…reminiscent of notions of ‘safe talk’ (Hornberger and Chick, 2001) and ‘procedural display’ (Bloome et al., 1989) that index the tendency of classroom interactions to move around and ‘blind stitch’ potential obstacles for its progressivity (Stivers and Robinson, 2006), such as language problems.”
The interactional management of claims of insufficient knowledge in English language classrooms (2013, background): “Stivers and Robinson (2006) further claim that ‘the non-answer response does not further the activity even though it completes the sequence’ (372).”
Judgments Concerning the Valence of Inter-Turn Silence Across Speakers of American English, Italian, and Japanese (2011, methodology): “Empirical research based on that model indicates both a preference for progressivity in talk (Stivers & Robinson, 2006) and that gaps arising in the context of conditional relevance (utterances designed for, and expecting, responses of some sort) will prove problematic for speakers (Davidson, 1984;…”
Universals and cultural variation in turn-taking in conversation (2009, background): “, I don’t know or I can’t remember) (30, 31) or if they give a response that runs against the bias of the question (e.”