Pushing the Distribution Model to its Limits: Distributed “listening” in a Helpline

Article
  • 75 Downloads

Abstract

Our case study explores the extent to which a “Distributed Cognition”-like ethnographic approach can be used to analyze situations which are not at first sight compatible with the precepts of computational cognition. In the first part of the paper, we analyze the collective listening of phone calls in a helpline. We show why collective listening can be considered a “distributed collective practice”, with a mode of coordination based on repeated verbal re-enactments of difficult phone calls, rather than upon the discrete computational steps normally assumed in the standard model. In the second part of the paper, we analyse the organizational and interactional learning which takes place when collective listening is re-mediated by using e-mail exchanges rather than telephone conversations to communicate distress. Our conclusion discusses critically the viability of the distribution model in a context of collective listening.

Keywords

cooperative work distributed cognition distribution models email-based interaction phone-based interaction 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Arminen Illka (2004). Second Stories: The Salience of Interpersonal Communication for Mutual Help in Alcoholics Anonymous. Journal of Pragmatics 36: 319–347CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Boltanski Luc (1993). La souffrance à distance. Paris, MétailliéGoogle Scholar
  3. Borkman Thomasina (1999). Understanding Self-Help/Mutual Aid. Experiential Learning in the Commons. New Brunswick, Rutgers University PressGoogle Scholar
  4. Borzeix Anni (2001). Le travail et sa sociologie à l’épreuve du langage. In: Borzeix A., Fraenkel B (eds), Langage et Travail. Communication, Cognition, Action. Paris, Editions du CNRS, pp. 55–87Google Scholar
  5. Chauvière Michel and Frotiée Brigitte(1998). La téléPhonie Sociale: Perspectives Sociologiques. Revue Française des Affaires Sociales 52(2): 167–180Google Scholar
  6. Conein, Bernard (1997): L’action avec les objets. Un autre visage de l’action située? Raisons Pratiques 8 (Cognition et information en société), pp. 25–45Google Scholar
  7. Dodier Nicolas (1995). Les hommes et les machines. Paris, MetailiéGoogle Scholar
  8. Fassin Didier (2004). Des maux indicibles. Sociologie des lieux d’écoute. Paris, Editions la DécouverteGoogle Scholar
  9. Goffman Ervin (1961). Asylums. Essays on the Social Situation of Mental Patients and Other Inmates. Garden City, N.Y., Anchor BooksGoogle Scholar
  10. Halverson Christine (2002). Activity Theory and Distributed Cognition: Or What Does CSCW Need to DO with Theories? Computer Supported Cooperative Work 11: 243–267CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hutchins Edwin (1994). Comment le cockpit se souvient de ses vitesses. Sociologie du travail 36(4): 451–473Google Scholar
  12. Hutchins Edwin (1995). Cognition in the Wild. Cambridge, Mass., M.I.T. PressGoogle Scholar
  13. Jaffrin, Stéphane, (1992): Les services d’aide psychologique par telephone. Paris, P.U.F., Que Sais-je? no. 2682Google Scholar
  14. Latour Bruno (1987). Science in Action. Milton Keynes, Open University PressGoogle Scholar
  15. Lave Jean and Etienne Wenger (1991). Situated Learning. Legitimate Peripheral Participation. Cambridge, Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar
  16. Law John (2002). On Hidden Heterogeneities: Complexities, Formalism, and Aircraft Design. Complexities. In: Law J. and Mol A. (eds), Social Studies of Knowledge Practices. Durham, Duke University Press, pp. 116–141Google Scholar
  17. Nardi Bonnie (1996). Studying Context: A Comparison of Activity Theory, Situated Action Models, and Distributed Cognition. In: Nardi B. (ed), Context and Consciousness. Cambridge, M.I.T. Press, pp. 69–102Google Scholar
  18. Norman, D (1993): Les artefacts cognitifs. Raisons pratiques, vol. 4, pp. 15–33Google Scholar
  19. Sellen Abigail and Richard Harper (2002). The Myth of the Paperless Office. Cambridge, M.I.T. PressGoogle Scholar
  20. Thévenot Laurent (1994). Le régime de familiarité. Genèses 17: 72–101CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Weller Jean-Marc (2002). Stress relationnel et distance au public. De la relation de service à la relation d’aide. Sociologie du travail 44:75–97CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, Inc. 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Département Economie, GestionSciences Humaines, ENSTParisFrance

Personalised recommendations