Analyzing interaction involving wheelchairs
Configuring interactional spaces to engage in activity and initiate conversation
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1558/jircd.25573Keywords:
mobility impairments, configuration of interactional spaces, conversation initiation, conversation analysis, wheelchair useAbstract
Background: This study shows how the use of wheelchairs due to mobility impairment influences the configuration of interactional spaces and the initiation of conversation. It takes as a case in point the spatial arrangements and interactions between sports students using wheelchairs and their co-participants in a Danish sports high school.
Method: Using the framework of research into ethnomethodological conversation analysis (EMCA) in atypical multimodal interaction, this study demonstrates how co-participants with and without impairments consider factors such as the position, size, design, and maneuverability of the wheelchair when they configure interactional spaces and organize conversational beginnings, and how the bodily orientation of the wheelchair user toward a specific physical environment and space is also taken into account. Furthermore, the co-participants’ conversation is adapted to fit these arrangements. The study describes features of spatial configurations that apply irrespective of the presence, type, and degree of disability in speech, language, and communication among the co-participants. The study draws on 10 hours of video recordings.
Results and conclusion: The study indicates a need to investigate everyday conversation in its natural surroundings. Detailed descriptions of how co-participants draw upon available material, technological, and bodied ‘modes’ as resources may re-specify our understanding of aspects of conversations when impairments are involved.
References
Broth, M., and Mondada, L., (2013). Walking away: The embodied achievement of activity closings in mobile interaction. Journal of Pragmatics, 47(1), 41–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2012.11.016
Button, G., and Casey, N. (1984). Generating topic: The use of topic initial elicitors. In J. M. Atkinson and J. Heritage (Eds.), Structures of social action: Studies in conversation analysis (pp. 167–190). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511665868.013
Ciolek, M. T., and Kendon, A. (2007). Environment and the spatial arrangement of conversational encounters. Sociological Inquiry, 50(3), 237–271. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-682X.1980.tb00022.x
Depperman, A. (2013). Turn-design at turn-beginnings: Multimodal resources to deal with tasks of turn-construction in German. Journal of Pragmatics, 46(1), 91–121. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2012.07.010
Depperman, A., Lorenza, M., and Reinholdt, S. (2010). Agenda and emergence in a meeting. From work to break-like activities and back to work. Journal of Pragmatics, 42(6), 1700–1718. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2009.10.006
Duranti, A., and Goodwin, C. (1992). Rethinking context: Language as an interactive phenomenon. Studies in the social and cultural foundations of language 11. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Garfinkel, H. (1964). Studies of the routine grounds of everyday activities. Social Problems, 11(3), 225–250. https://doi.org/10.2307/798722
Garfinkel H (1991) Respecification: Evidence for locally produced, naturally accountable phenomena of order, logic, reason, meaning, method, etc. in and as of the essential haecceity of immortal ordinary society – an announcement of studies. In: G. Button (Ed.), Ethnomethodology and the human sciences (pp. 10–19). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Goffman, E. (1963). Behavior in public places: Notes on the social organization of gatherings. New York: Free Press.
Heritage, J. (1984). A change-of-state token and aspects of its sequential placement. In J. M. Atkinson and J. Heritage (Eds.), Structures of social action: Studies in conversation analysis (pp. 299–345). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511665868.020
Kendon A. (1977). Spatial organization in social encounters: The F-formation system. In A. Kendon (Ed.), Studies in behavior of face-to-face interaction. Lisse: Peter DeRidder Press.
Kendon, A. (1990). Conducting interaction: Patterns of behavior in focused encounters. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kress, G. R. (2010). Multimodality: A social semiotic approach to contemporary communication. London: Routledge.
Kress, G. R., and Leeuwen, T.V. (2001). Multimodal discourse: The modes and media of contemporary communication. London: Edward Arnold.
Krummheuer, A. L. (2019). Instrumental and moral assistance: An embodied interaction analysis of assisted shopping activities between a person with acquired brain injury and her caregivers. Pragmatics and Society, 11(3), 440–462. https://doi.org/10.1075/ps.17026.kru
Krummheuer, A. L., and Raudaskoski, P. L. (2016). Trying-out a walking help: Participation through situated learning in the adjustment and assessment of welfare technology. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics, 30(10), 812–831. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699206.2016.1209245
Lyman, S. M., and Scott, M. B. (1967). Territoriality: A neglected sociological dimension. Social Problems, 15(2), 236–249. https://doi.org/10.2307/799516
Maynard, D. W., and Clayman, S. E. (1991). The diversity of ethnomethodology. Annual Review of Sociology, 17, 385–418. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.so.17.080191.002125
Mondada, L. (2009). Emergent focused interactions in public places: A systematic analysis of the multimodal achievement of a common interactional space. Journal of Pragmatics, 41(10), 1977–1997. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2008.09.019
Mondada, L. (2013). Interactional space and the study of embodied talk-in-interaction. In P. Auer, M. Hilpert, A. Stuckenbrock, et al. (Eds.), Space in language and linguistics (pp. 247–275). Berlin and Boston: Walter de Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110312027.247
Mondada, L. (2014). Conventions for multimodal transcription. Retrieved May 2023 from https://franzoesistik.philhist.unibas.ch/fileadmin/user_upload/franzoesistik/mondada_multimodal_conventions.pdf
Mortensen, K. (2009). Establishing recipiency in pre-beginning position in the second language classroom. Discourse Processes, 46(5), 491–515. https://doi.org/10.1080/01638530902959463
Norris, S. (2004). Analyzing multimodal interaction. New York: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203379493
Pillet-Shore, D. M. (2008). Coming together: Creating and maintaining social relationships through the opening of face-to-face interactions. Los Angeles: UCLA.
Rasmussen, G. (in print). The relevance of EMCA studies in multimodal interactions involving blindness and visual impairment to atypical interaction research. In B. Due (Ed.), The practical accomplishment of blind people’s ordinary activities. Routledge.
Rimmer, J., and Marques, A. (2012). Physical activity for people with disabilities. Lancet, 380(9838), 193–195. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(12)61028-9
Robillard, A. B. (1996). Anger in-the-social-order. Body & Society, 2(1), 17–30. https://doi.org/10.1177/1357034X96002001002
Robillard, A. B. (1999). Meaning of a disability: The lived experience of paralysis. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
Rossano, F. (2013). Gaze in conversation. In J. Sidnell and T. Stivers (Eds.), The handbook of conversation analysis (pp. 308–329). Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118325001.ch15
Sacks, H., Schegloff, E. A., and Jefferson, G. (1974) A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation. Language, 50(4), 696–735. https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.1974.0010
Sahlström, F. (2002). The interactional organization of hand raising in classroom interaction. Journal of Classroom Interaction, 37(2), 47–57.
Schegloff, E. (2007). Sequence organization in interaction. A primer in conversation analysis. New York: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511791208
Sidnell, J., and Stivers, T. (2012). The handbook of conversation analysis. New Jersey: Wiley-Blackwell. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118325001
Vom Lehn, D. (2013). Withdrawing from exhibits: The interactional organisation of museum visits. In P. Haddington, L. Mondada, and M. Nevile (Eds.), Interaction and mobility: Language and the body in motion (pp. 65–90). Berlin: De Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110291278.65
WHO (2018a). Assistive technology. Retrieved September 2019 from https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/assistive-technology
WHO (2018b). Global action plan on physical activity 2018–2030: More active people for a healthier world. Geneva: World Health Organization.
Wilkinson, R., Rae, J., and Rasmussen, G. (2020). Atypical interaction: The impact of communicative impairments within everyday talk. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
