Establishing joint decisions in a dyad

Discourse Studies

Volumn 14, Issue 6, 2012, Pages 779-803

  Stevanovic, Melisa ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF HELSINKI   (Finland)

Author keywords

Access; acquiescence; agreement; commitment; conversation analysis; decision making; indirectness; participation; proposals; workplace meetings

Indexed keywords

EID: 84871393201     PISSN: 14614456     EISSN: 14617080     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1461445612456654     Document Type: Article

References (50)

1. Asmuss B,Oshima S.Negotiation of entitlement in proposal sequences.Discourse Studies. 2012;14:67-86.
2. Bales RFInteraction Process Analysis: A Method for the Study of Small Groups. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press; 1950:.
3. Bales RF,Strodtbeck FL.Phases in group problem-solving.Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology. 1951;46:485-495.
4. Brodbeck FC,Kerschreiter R,Mojzisch A,Schulz-Hardt S.Group decision making under conditions of distributed knowledge: The information asymmetries model.Academy of Management Review. 2007;32:459-479.
5. Brown P,Levinson SCPoliteness: Some Universals in Language Usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1987:.
6. Charles C,Amiram G,Whelan T.Shared decision-making in the medical encounter: What does it mean?.Social Science & Medicine. 1997;44:681-692.
7. Davidson JStructures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis. Atkinson JMHeritage J, ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1984:102-128.
8. Dewey JHow We Think. Boston, MA: Heath; 1910:.
9. Festinger L.A theory of social comparison processes.Human Relations. 1954;7:117-140.
10. Fisher BA.Decision emergence: Phases in group decision making.Speech Monographs. 1970;37:53-66.
11. Goodwin MH.Participation, affect, and trajectory in family directive/response sequences.Text and Talk. 2006;26:513-542.
12. Hakulinen AStudies in Interactional Linguistics. Couper-Kuhlen ESelting M, ed. Amsterdam: John Benjamins; 2001:171-198.
13. Hakulinen A,Vilkuna M,Korhonen R, et alIso suomen kielioppi. Helsinki: Finnish Literature Society; 2004:.
14. Hall J.Decisions, decisions, decisions.Psychology Today. 1971;5:51 86-54 88.
15. Heritage JGarfinkel and Ethnomethodology. Cambridge: Polity Press; 1984:.
16. Heritage J,Raymond G.The terms of agreement: Indexing epistemic authority and subordination in talk-in-interaction.Social Psychology Quarterly. 2005;68:15-38.
17. Houtkoop HEstablishing Agreement: An Analysis of Proposal-Acceptance Sequences. Dordrecht: Foris Publications; 1987:.
18. Huisman M.Decision-making in meetings as talk-in-interaction.International Studies of Management and Organization. 2001;31:69-90.
19. Janis ICrucial Decisions: Leadership in Policymaking and Crisis Management. New York: Free Press; 1989:.
20. Jefferson GStudies in Social Interaction. Sudnow DN, ed. New York: Free Press; 1972:294-333.
21. Koshik I.Wh-questions used as challenges.Discourse Studies. 2003;5:51-77.
22. Laakso M,Sorjonen M-L.Cut-off or particle - Devices for initiating self-repair in conversation.Journal of Pragmatics. 2010;42:1151-1172.
23. Laitinen LGrammar from the Human Perspective: Case, Space and Person in Finnish. Helasvuo M-LCambell L, ed. Amsterdam: John Benjamins; 2006:209-231.
24. Levinson SCTalk at Work: Interaction in Institutional Settings. Drew PHeritage J, ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1992:66-100.
25. LiljaN (2010) Ongelmista oppimiseen: Toisen aloittamat korjausjaksot kakkoskielisessä keskustelussa [Other-initiated repair sequences in Finnish second language interactions]. Doctoral dissertation, University of Jyväskylä, Finland.
26. LindströmA (1999) Language as social action: Grammar, prosody, and interaction in Swedish conversation. Doctoral dissertation, University of Uppsala, Sweden.
27. Lukes SPower: A Radical View. 2005) Power: A Radical View, 2nd edn.Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan; 2005:.
28. Meier CArbeitsbesprechungen: Interaktionsstrukturen, Interaktionsdynamik und Konsequenzen einer sozialen Form. Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag; 1997:.
29. Ogden R.Phonetics and social action in agreements and disagreements.Journal of Pragmatics. 2006;38:1752-1775.
30. Pomerantz AStructures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis. Atkinson JMHeritage J, ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1984a:57-101.
31. Pomerantz AStructures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis. Atkinson JMHeritage J, ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1984b:152-164.
32. Poole MS,Roth J.Decision development in small groups IV: A typology of group decision paths.Human Communication Research. 1989;15:323-356.
33. Raevaara LSuomalaisen keskustelun keinoja I. Hakulinen A, ed. Helsinki: Department of Finnish, University of Helsinki; 1989:147-161.
34. Sarangi S,Clarke A.Zones of expertise and the management of uncertainty in genetics risk communication.Research on Language and Social Interaction. 2002;35:139-171.
35. Schegloff EASequence Organization in Interaction: A Primer in Conversation Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2007:.
36. Searle JR.A classification of illocutionary acts.Language in Society. 1976;5:1-23.
37. Selting M.Emphatic speech style - With special focus on the prosodic signaling of heightened emotive involvement in conversation.Journal of Pragmatics. 1994;22:375-408.
38. Sorjonen M-LResponding in Conversation: A Study of Response Particles in Finnish. Amsterdam: John Benjamins; 2001:.
39. Stasser G,Stewart D.Discovery of hidden profiles by decision-making groups: Solving a problem versus making a judgment.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1992;63:426-434.
40. Steensig J,Drew P.Introduction: Questioning and affiliation/disaffiliation in interaction.Discourse Studies. 2008;10:5-15.
41. Stevanovic M.Prosodic salience and the emergence of new decisions: On the prosody of approval in Finnish workplace interaction.Journal of Pragmatics. 2012;44:843-862.
42. Stevanovic M.Constructing a proposal as a thought. submitted.
43. Stevanovic M,Peräkylä A.Deontic authority in interaction: The right to announce, propose and decide.Research on Language and Social Interaction. 2012;45 (3): 297-321.
44. Stivers T,Rossano F.Mobilising response.Research on Language and Social Interaction. 2010;43:3-31.
45. Tallman I,Leik RK,Gray LN,Stafford MC.A theory of problem-solving behavior.Social Psychology Quarterly. 1993;56:157-177.
46. Tykkyläinen T,Laakso M.Five-year-old girls negotiating pretend play: Proposals with the Finnish particle.jooko. Journal of Pragmatics. 2010;42:242-256.
47. Tyler TR,Lind EA.A relational model of authority in groups.Advances in Experimental Social Psychology. 1992;25:115-191.
48. Vehviläinen S.Avoiding providing solutions: Orienting to the ideal of students' self-directedness in counselling interaction.Discourse Studies. 2003;5:131-156.
49. Vehviläinen S.Student-initiated advice in academic supervision.Research on Language and Social Interaction. 2009;42:163-190.
50. Walker T,Drew P,Local J.Responding indirectly.Journal of Pragmatics. 2011;43:2434-2451.