Accountability and public displays of knowing in an undergraduate computer-mediated communication context

Discourse Studies

Volumn 13, Issue 6, 2011, Pages 671-686

  Lester, Jessica N ^a   Paulus, Trena M ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE   (United States)

Author keywords

blogging; computer mediated communication; discursive psychology; higher education; institutional talk

Indexed keywords

EID: 84255194904     PISSN: 14614456     EISSN: 14617080     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1461445611421361     Document Type: Article

References (59)

1. Arminen IInstitutional Interaction: Studies of Talk at Work. Burlington, VT: Ashgate; 2005:.
2. Attenborough F.'I don't f***ing care!' Marginalia and the (textual) negotiation of an academic identity by university students.Discourse & Communication. 2011;5 (2): 99-121.
3. Ausubel DPEducational Psychology: A Cognitive View. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston; 1968:.
4. Ausubel DPThe Acquisition and Retention of Knowledge: A Cognitive View. London: Kluwer Academic Publishers; 2000:.
5. Barnes B,Palmary I,Durrheim K.The denial of racism: The role of humor, personal experience, and self-censorship.Journal of Language and Social Psychology. 2001;20 (3): 321-338.
6. Benwell B,Stokoe EH.Constructing discussion tasks in university tutorials: Shifting dynamics and identities.Discourse Studies. 2002;4 (4): 429-453.
7. Benwell B,Stokoe EH.University students resisting academic identity.Applying Conversation Analysis. Richards KSeedhouse R, ed. New York: Palgrave Macmillan; 2005:124-139.
8. Billig MArguing and Thinking: A Rhetorical Approach to Social Psychology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1987:.
9. Bloom BSHuman Characteristics and School Learning. New York: McGraw-Hill; 1976:.
10. Channell JVague Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1994:.
11. Clark D,Sampson V,Weinberger A,Erkens G.Analytic frameworks for assessing dialogic argumentation in online learning environments.Educational Psychology Review. 2007;19:343-374.
12. Cromdal J,Tholander M,Aronsson K.'Doing reluctance': Managing delivery of assessments in peer evaluation.Discursive Research in Practice. Hepburn AWiggins S, ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2007:203-223.
13. De Wever B,Schellens T,Valcke M,Van Keer H.Content analysis schemes to analyze transcripts of online asynchronous discussion groups: A review.Computers & Education. 2006;46:6-28.
14. Dewey JHow We Think: A Restatement of the Relation of Reflective Thinking to the Educative Process. 1933) How We Think: A Restatement of the Relation of Reflective Thinking to the Educative Process, rev. edn (first published 1910). Boston, MA: Heath.Boston, MA: Heath; 1933:.
15. Dochy FJRC,De Ridjt C,Dyck W.Cognitive prerequisites and learning: How far have we progressed since Bloom? Implications for educational practice and teaching.Active Learning in Higher Education. 2002;3:265-284.
16. Drew P,Heritage JTalk at Work: Interaction in Institutional Settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1992:.
17. Edwards D.Script formulations: A study of event descriptions in conversations.Journal of Language and Social Psychology. 1994;13:211-247.
18. Edwards D.Two to tango: Script formulations, dispositions, and rhetorical symmetry in relationship.Research on Language and Social Interaction. 1995;28 (4): 319-350.
19. Edwards DDiscourse and Cognition. London: SAGE; 1997:.
20. Edwards D.Extreme case formulations: Softeners, investment and doing non-literal.Research on Language and Social Interaction. 2000;33 (4): 347-373.
21. Edwards D,Potter J.Language and causation: A discursive action model of description and attribution.Psychological Review. 1993;100 (1): 23-41.
22. Edwards D,Potter J.Discursive psychology, mental states and description.Conversation and Cognition. te Molder HPotter J, ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2005:241-259.
23. Friesen N.Discursive psychology and educational technology: Beyond the cognitive revolution.Mind, Culture & Activity. 2009;16:130-144.
24. FriesenNHugT (2011) Investigating Web 2.0 in education: A discursive paradigm for research. In: RiskuHPeschlMF (eds) Kognition und Technologie im kooperativen Lernen: Vom Wissenstransfer zur Knowledge Creation. Vienna: Vienna University Press. Available at: http://learningspaces.org/n/papers/Learning_with_web2.0.pdf.
25. Garfinkel HStudies in Ethnomethodology. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall; 1967:.
26. Garrison DR,Anderson T,Archer W.Critical thinking, cognitive presence, and computer conferencing in distance education.American Journal of Distance Education. 2001;15 (1): 7-23.
27. Garrison DR,Cleveland-Innes M,Koole M,Kappelman J.Revising methodological issues in transcript analysis: Negotiated coding and reliability.Internet and Higher Education. 2006;9:1-8.
28. Giles D.Constructing identities in cyberspace: The case of eating disorders.British Journal of Social Psychology. 2006;45:463-477.
29. Glenn C,Gray LThe Hodges Harbrace Handbook, MLA updated edition. 2009) The Hodges Harbrace Handbook, MLA updated edition, 17th edn. Florence, KY: Wadsworth.Florence, KY: Wadsworth; 2009:.
30. Horne J,Wiggins S.Doing being 'on the edge': Managing the dilemma of being authentically suicidal in an online forum.Sociology of Health & Illness. 2009;31 (2): 170-184.
31. Horton-Salway M,Montague J,Wiggins S,Seymour-Smith S.Mapping the components of the telephone conference: An analysis of tutorial talk at a distance learning institution.Discourse Studies. 2008;10 (6): 737-758.
32. Housley W,Fitzgerald R.Categorization, interaction, policy, and debate.Critical Discourse Studies. 2007;4 (2): 187-206.
33. Hsu P-L,Roth W-M.Understanding beliefs, identity, conceptions, and motivations from a discursive psychology perspectiveSecond International Handbook of Science Education. Fraser BJTobin KMcRobbie C, ed. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer-Verlag;.
34. Jefferson GInteractional Competence. Psathas G, ed. New York: University Press of America; 1990:63-92.
35. Lamerichs J,Molder HFM.Computer-mediated communication: From a cognitive to a discursive model.New Media & Society. 2003;5 (4): 451-473.
36. Lamerichs J,Molder HFM.'And then I'm really like': 'Preliminary' self-quotations in adolescent talk.Discourse Studies. 2009;11:401-419.
37. Limberg H.Discourse structure of academic talk in university office hour interactions.Discourse Studies. 2007;9 (2): 176-193.
38. Marquez AC.Testimonies in the British and Spanish parliaments: A contrastive study on domestic/gender violence.Journal of Pragmatics. 2010;42:2172-2180.
39. Marra RM,Moore JL,Klimczek AK.Content analysis of online discussion forums: A comparative analysis of protocols.Educational Technology Research & Development. 2004;52 (2): 23-40.
40. Meyer KA.Evaluating online discussions: Four different frames of analysis.Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks. 2004;8 (2): 101-114.
41. Morrow PR.Telling about problems and giving advice in an Internet discussion forum: Some discourse features.Discourse Studies. 2006;8 (4): 531-548.
42. Muhr TUser's Manual for ATLAS.ti 5.0. Berlin: ATLAS.ti Scientific Software Development GmbH; 2004:.
43. Paulus T,Spence M.Using blogs to identify misconceptions in a large undergraduate lecture course.TechTrends. 2010;54 (5): 62-68.
44. Pomerantz A.Extreme case formulations: A way of legitimizing claims.Human Studies. 1986;9:219-229.
45. Potter J.Discourse analysis as a way of analyzing naturally occurring talk.Qualitative Research: Theory, Method and Practice. Silverman D, ed. London: SAGE; 1997:144-160.
46. Potter J.Discourse analysis.Handbook of Data Analysis. Hardy MABryman A, ed. London: SAGE; 2004:607-624.
47. Potter J.Making psychology relevant.Discourse & Society. 2005;16 (5): 739-747.
48. Potter J,Wetherell MDiscourse and Social Psychology. London: SAGE; 1987:.
49. Potter J,Edwards D,Wetherell M.A model of discourse in action.American Behavioral Scientist. 1993;36 (3): 383-401.
50. Riley S,Rodham K,Gavin J.Doing weight: Pro-ana and recovery identities in cyberspace.Journal of Community & Applied Psychology. 2009;19:348-359.
51. Roth W-M,Hsu P-L.Interest and motivation: A cultural historical and discursive psychological approachEducational Psychology: Cognition and Learning, Individual Differences and Motivation. Larson JE, ed. Hauppauge, NY: Nova Science; 2008:81-112.
52. Rourke L,Anderson T.Validity in quantitative content analysis.Educational Technology Research and Development. 2004;52 (1): 5-18.
53. Rourke L,Kanuka H.Barriers to online critical discourse.Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning. 2007;2:105-126.
54. Rourke L,Anderson T,Garrison DR,Archer W.Methodological issues in the content analysis of computer conference transcripts.International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education. 2000;11:1-16.
55. Sacks HLectures on Conversation. Oxford: Blackwell; 1992:.
56. Schön DThe Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action. New York: Basic Books; 1983:.
57. Schrire S.Knowledge building in asynchronous discussion groups: Going beyond quantitative analysis.Computers & Education. 2006;46:49-70.
58. Sneijder P,Molder HFM.Moral logic and logical morality: Attributions of responsibility and blame in online discourse on veganism.Discourse & Society. 2005;16 (5): 675-696.
59. Stokoe EH.Constructing topicality in university students' small-group discussion: A conversation analytic approach.Language and Education. 2000;14 (3): 184-203.