Vignette d'image

Bangerter, Adrian

Nom
Bangerter, Adrian
Affiliation principale
Site web
Fonction
Professeur ordinaire
Email
adrian.bangerter@unine.ch
Identifiants
https://libra.unine.ch/handle/123456789/498

Résultat de la recherche

Filtres

52
1
6
51
Réinitialiser les filtres

Paramètres

Voici les éléments 1 - 6 sur 6
  • Publication
    Métadonnées seulement
  • Publication
    Accès libre
  • Publication
    Accès libre
    Managing Third-Party Interruptions in Conversations: Effects of Duration and Conversational Role
    (2010)
    Bangerter, Adrian 
    ;
    Chevalley, Eric
    ;
    Derouwaux, Sylvie
    Dealing with interruptions in collaborative tasks involves two important processes: managing the face of one’s partners and collaboratively reconstructing the topic. In an experiment, pairs were interrupted while narrating personal stories. The duration of the interruption and the conversational role of the target were manipulated. Listeners were more polite than narrators, and longer suspensions caused more effort in reinstatement than short suspensions, but participants were not more polite when suspensions were long.
  • Publication
    Accès libre
    Suspending and reinstating collaborative activities
    (2010)
    Chevalley, Eric
    ;
    Bangerter, Adrian 
    There is an interest in how people coordinate multiple activities with multiple partners, and in particular, how people deal with interruptions. Interruptions happen unexpectedly. They can cause errors and loss of productivity. Effects of interruptions have been studied in individual tasks, but not in collaborative tasks. When pairs deal with an interruption, they have to jointly suspend their activity, address the matter, and later jointly reinstate their activity. The main goal of the dissertation was to define a model of suspensions and to measure constrains on the suspension and the reinstatement steps. Pairs suspend momentarily without taking leave of each other. This requires the coordination of two important processes: Politeness and common ground. First, politeness is often involved in suspensions, because asking one's partner to wait while one does something else is facethreatening. Two factors affect politeness: The degree of personal responsibility of participants proposing suspensions and durations of suspensions. Second, continuing tasks requires reconstructing joint representations of the tasks (common ground). Several factors affect the reconstruction of common ground: The persons interrupted the timing of suspension and the availability of cues about the state of the task. Five studies were conducted. Study 1 used naturally-occurring suspensions in telephone conversations from a corpus data. Study 2 & 3 used suspensions triggered with a cover story in laboratory. Study 2 & 3 manipulated participants’ roles in conversations and durations of interruptions. Results revealed that participants were more polite when suspension lasted longer, and it took more collaborative effort to reinstate conversations. Also, initiators of suspensions were more polite when they were listening than speaking. Study 4 & 5 manipulated the duration and the timing of interruptions during a goal-oriented task. Additionally, Study 4 manipulated the participants’ role during interruptions, and Study 5 manipulated the visibility of workspace between participants. Results showed that participants took more time to reinstate tasks when interruptions lasted longer and when it happened in the middle of sub-tasks, compared to when interruptions were brief and happened between sub-tasks. Also, they took more time to reinstate when both participants were distracted during interruptions, rather than when just one was distracted, and when participants did not share their workspace, rather than when they did share a workspace.
  • Publication
    Accès libre
    Suspending and Reinstating Joint Activities With Dialogue
    (2010)
    Chevalley, Eric
    ;
    Bangerter, Adrian 
    Interruptions are common in joint activities like conversations. Typically, interrupted participants suspend the activity, address the interruption, and then reinstate the activity. In conversation, people jointly commit to interact and to talk about a topic, establishing these commitments sequentially. When a commitment is suspended, face is threatened and grounding disrupted. This article proposes and tests a model for suspending and reinstating joint activities, using evidence from naturally occurring suspensions in the Switchboard corpus (Study 1) and from a laboratory experiment (Study 2). Results showed that long suspensions led to more politeness and more collaborative effort in reinstatement than short suspensions. Also, listeners were more polite than speakers in suspending joint activities. Overall, suspending and reinstating a joint activity was shown to be a collaborative task that requires coordination of both the topic and the participants' face needs.