Abstract
The aim of this experiment was to determine if the frequency of interruptions during an interaction amplifies the effect of the type of the interruptions on the interruptee (the amplification hypothesis). While interviewing 90 participants, two confederates manipulated four different kinds of interruptions (change-subject, same-subject, disagreement, and supportive interruptions) at two different frequencies (mean rates, 1.58 and 2.94 per minute), in addition to a no-interruption control condition. At the end of the interview, the participants were asked to answer questions about themselves, the interlocutor, and the situation. The results showed that the negative effects of change- and same-subject interruptions were amplified when they were more frequent, as were the positive effects of supportive interruptions. Contrary to expectations, disagreement interruptions were regarded as positive. All the results provide support for the amplification hypothesis.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Brown, P., & Levinson, S. C. (1978). Universals in language usage: Politeness phenomena. In E. Goody (Ed.), Questions and politeness (pp. 53–310). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Brown, P., & Levinson, S. C. (1987). Politeness: Some universal in language use. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Bull, P. (2002). Communication under the microscope. The theory and the practice of microanalysis. London: Routledge.
Burgoon, J. K., & Burgoon, M. (2001). Expectancy theories. In W. P. Robinson & H. Giles (Eds.), The new handbook of language and social psychology (pp. 79–101). New York: John Wiley and Sons.
Burgoon, J. K., & Dunbar, N. E. (2006). Nonverbal expressions of dominance and power in human relationships. In V. Manusov & M. L. Patterson (Eds.), The Sage handbook of nonverbal communication (pp. 279–297). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Burgoon, J. K., & Ebesu Hubbard, A. S. (2005). Cross-cultural and intercultural applications of expectancy violations theory and interaction adaptation theory. In W. Gudykunst (Ed.), Theorizing about intercultural communication (pp. 149–171). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Burgoon, J. K., Le Poire, B. A., & Rosenthal, R. (1995). Effects of preinteraction expectancies and target communication on perceiver reciprocity and compensation in dyadic interaction. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 31, 287–321.
Canary, D. J., & Spitzberg, B. H. (1987). Appropriateness and effectiveness perceptions of conflict strategies. Human Communication Research, 14, 93–118.
Chambliss, C. A., & Feeny, N. (1992). Effects of sex of subject, sex of interrupter, and topic of conversation on the perceptions of interruptions. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 75, 1235–1241.
Coon, C. A., & Schwanenflugel, P. J. (1996). Evaluation of interruption behavior by naïve encoders. Discourse Processes, 22, 1–24.
Crown, C. L., & Cummins, D. A. (1998). Objective versus perceptive vocal interruptions in the dialogues of unacquainted pairs. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 17, 372–389.
Dunbar, N. E., & Burgoon, J. K. (2005). Perceptions of power and interactional dominance in interpersonal relationships. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 22, 207–233.
Farley, S. D. (2008). Attaining status at the expense of likeability: Pilfering power through conversational interruption. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 32, 241–260.
Farley, S. D., Ashcraft, A. M., Stasson, M. F., & Nusbaum, R. L. (2010). Nonverbal reactions to conversational interruptions: A test of complementarity theory and the status/gener parallel. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 34, 193–206.
Ferguson, N. (1977). Simultaneous speech, interruptions and dominance. British Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 16, 295–302.
Gnisci, A., Papa, F., & Spedaletti, S. (1999). Usability aspects, socio-relational context and learning performance in the virtual classroom: A laboratory experiment. Behaviour & Information Technology, 18, 431–443.
Goffman, E. (1955). On face-work: An analysis of ritual elements in social interaction. Psychiatry, 18, 213–231 (Reprinted in (1967). Interaction ritual: Essays on face to face behavior (pp. 5–45). Garden City, NY: Anchor.
Goldberg, J. (1990). Interrupting the discourse on interruptions: An analysis in terms of relationally neutral, power- and rapport-oriented acts. Journal of Pragmatics, 14, 883–903.
Hawkins, K. (1988). Interruptions in task-oriented conversation. Effects of violations of expectations by males and females. Women’s Studies in Communication, 11, 1–20.
Hawkins, K. (1991). Some consequences of deep interruption in task-oriented communication. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 10, 185–203.
Holtgraves, T. (2001). Politeness. In W. P. Robinson & H. Giles (Eds.), The new handbook of language and social psychology (pp. 341–355). New York: Wiley.
LaFrance, M. (1992). Gender and interruptions: Individual infraction or violation of the social order? Psychology of Women Quarterly, 16, 497–512.
Li, H. L. (2001). Cooperative and intrusive interruptions in inter- and intracultural dyadic discourse. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 20, 259–284.
Livi, S., Pierro, A., & Mannetti, L. (1999). Adeguatezza Conversazionale: Validazione di una misura di competenza comunicativa interpersonale. Quaderni di Psicologia del Lavoro, 6–7, 77–86.
Murata, K. (1994). Intrusive or cooperative? A cross-cultural study of interruption. Journal of Pragmatics, 21, 385–400.
Omoto, A. M., & Snyder, M. (1995). Sustained helping without obligation: Motivation, longevity of service, and perceived attitude change among AIDS volunteers. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68, 671–686.
Orcutt, J. D., & Mennella, D. L. (1995). Gender and perception of interruption as intrusive talk: An experimental analysis and reply to criticism. Symbolic Interaction, 18, 59–72.
Osgood, C. E., Suci, G. J., & Tannenbaum, P. M. (1957). The measurement of meaning. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
Robinson, L. F., & Reis, H. T. (1989). The effects of interruption, gender, and status on interpersonal perceptions. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 13, 141–153.
Roger, D., Bull, P., & Smith, S. (1988). The development of a comprehensive system for classifying interruptions. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 7, 27–34.
Sellen, A. J. (1995). Remote conversations: The effects of mediating talk with technology. Human-Computer Interaction, 10, 401–444.
Tannen, D. (1984). Conversational style. Analyzing talk among friends. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation.
West, C., & Zimmerman, D. H. (1983). Small insults: A study of interruptions in cross-sex conversations between unacquainted persons. In B. Thorne, C. Kramarae, & N. Henley (Eds.), Language, gender, and society (pp. 103–117). Rowley, MA: Newbury.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Gnisci, A., Sergi, I., De Luca, E. et al. Does Frequency of Interruptions Amplify the Effect of Various Types of Interruptions? Experimental Evidence. J Nonverbal Behav 36, 39–57 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10919-011-0121-6
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10919-011-0121-6