Abstract
Interaction analysis is not a prerogative of any discipline in social sciences. It has its own history within each disciplinary field and is related to specific research objects. From the standpoint of psychology, this article first draws upon a distinction between factorial and dialogical conceptions of interaction. It then briefly presents the basis of a dialogical approach in psychology and focuses upon four basic assumptions. Each of them is examined on a theoretical and on a methodological level with a leading question: to what extent is it possible to develop analytical tools that are fully coherent with dialogical assumptions? The conclusion stresses the difficulty of developing methodological tools that are fully consistent with dialogical assumptions and argues that there is an unavoidable tension between accounting for the complexity of an interaction and using methodological tools which necessarily “monologise” this complexity.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
The original language of all excerpts is French. In the transcripts [...] indicates an overlap, words in capitals indicate that the speaker stresses a word and + means a brief pause.
Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children.
In this respect, the paradox, as Linell (2009) emphasises, is that dialogism, or any other theory, is also a monologising practice.
Let us note, however, that the role of object (“physical thing”) was already a special concern for Mead (1932).
References
Antaki, C., Barnes, R., & Leudar, I. (2005). Diagnostic formulations in psychotherapy. Discourse Studies, 7(6), 627–647.
Apothéloz, D., & Grossen, M. (1995). L’activité de reformulation comme marqueur de la construction du sens [The activity of reformulation as a marker of meaning construction]. Cahiers de l’Institut de Linguistique et des Sciences du Langage (7), 177–198.
Bakhtin, M. (1981). Discourse in the novel (C. Emerson & M. Holquist, Trans). In M. Holquist (Ed.), The dialogical imagination: four essays by M.M. Bakhtin (pp. 259–422 ). Austin: University of Texas Press. (Original work published 1935).
Bakhtin, M. (1986). Speech genre and other late essays (C. Emerson & M. Holquist, Trans). Austin: University of Texas Press. (Original work published 1953).
Bales, R. F. (1950). Interaction process analysis. A method for the study of small groups. Cambridge: Addison-Wesley.
Billig, M. (1996). Arguing and thinking (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bruner, J. (1990). Acts of meaning. London: Harvard University Press.
Bruner, J. S. (1996). The culture of education. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Buttny, R. (1996). Clients’ and therapist’s joint construction of the clients’ problems. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 29(2), 125–153.
Candlin, C. N. (ed). (2002). Research and practice in professional discourse. Hong Kong: City University of Hong Kong Press.
Cavaleri Pendino, A. (2008). Se raconter pour sortir de l’impasse des troubles alimentaires. Approche historico-culturelles d’une genèse de l’auto-contrôle de la prise alimentaire [Self-narratives as a way of getting out of a dead-end. Historico-cultural approach to the genesis of self-control in eating behaviour]. Bern: Peter Lang.
Cicourel, A. V. (1992). The interpenetration of communicative contexts: Examples from medical encounters. In A. Duranti & C. Goodwin (Eds.), Rethinking Context. Language as an interactive phenomena (2nd ed., pp. 290–310). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Cmejrková, S., & Prevignano, C. L. (2003). On conversation analysis. An interview with Emanuel A. Schegloff. In C. L. Prevignano & P. J. Thibault (Eds.), Discussing conversation analysis. The work of Emanuel A. Schegloff (pp. 11–55). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Coelho, N. E., & Figueiredo, L. C. (2003). Patterns of intersubjectivity in the constitution of subjectivity: Dimensions of otherness. Culture and Psychology, 9(3), 193–208.
Donaldson, M. (1978). Children’s mind. Glasgow: Fontana.
Drew, P., & Heritage, J. (Eds). (1992). Talk at work. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Drew, P., & Sorjonen, M.-L. (1997). Institutional dialogue. In T. A. Van Dijk (Ed.), Discourse as social interaction (pp. 92–118). London: Sage.
Elbers, E., & Kelderman, A. (1994). Grounds rules for testing: Expectations and misunderstandings in test situation. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 9(1), 110–120.
Engeström, Y., & Middleton, D. (eds). (1996). Cognition and communication at work. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Fivaz-Depeursinge, E., & Corboz-Warnery, A. (1999). The primary triangle. New York: Basic Books.
François, F. (2005). Interprétation et dialogue chez des enfants et quelques autres [Interpretation and dialogue in children and a few others]. Paris: ENS.
Gonçalves, M. M., & Salgado, J. (2001). Mapping the multiplicity of the self. Culture & Psychology, 7(3), 367–377.
Goodwin, C. (2006). Retrospection and prospective orientation in the construction of argumentative moves. Text and Talk, 26(4–5), 443–461.
Goodwin, C., & Goodwin, M. H. (1992). Assessment and the reconstruction of context. In A. Duranti & C. Goodwin (Eds.), Rethinking context (pp. 147–190). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Goodwin, C., & Duranti, A. (2002). Rethinking context: An introduction. In A. Duranti & C. Goodwin (Eds.), Rethinking context (pp. 1–42). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Grosjean, M., & Lacoste, M. (1999). Communication et intelligence collective [Communication and collective intelligence]. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.
Grossen, M. (1996). Counselling and gatekeeping: Definition of the problem and situation in a first therapeutic interview. Text, 16(2), 161–198.
Grossen, M. (2000). Institutional framing in thinking, learning and teaching. In H. Cowie & G. van der Aalsvoort (Eds.), Social interaction in learning and instruction. The meaning of discourse for the construction of knowledge (pp. 21–34). Amsterdam: Elsevier Science.
Grossen, M. (2008). Methods for studying collaborative creativity: An original and adventurous blend. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 3(3), 246–249.
Grossen, M., & Perret-Clermont, A.-N. (1994). Psycho-social perspective on cognitive development: Construction of adult-child intersubjectivity in logic tasks. In R. Maier & W. de Graaf (Eds.), Sociogenesis reexamined (pp. 243–260). New York: Springer.
Grossen, M., & Apothéloz, D. (1996). Communicating about communication in a therapeutic interview. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 15(2), 101–132.
Grossen, M., & Salazar Orvig, A. (eds). (2006). L’entretien clinique en pratiques. Analyse des interactions verbales d’un genre hétérogène [Clinical interview in practice. Analysis of verbal interactions in a heterogeneous genre]. Paris: Belin.
Grossen, M., Liengme Bessire, M.-J., & Perret-Clermont, A.-N. (1997). Construction de l’interaction et dynamiques socio-cognitives [Construction of the interaction and socio-cognitive dynamics]. In M. Grossen & B. Py (Eds.), Pratiques sociales et médiations symboliques (pp. 221–247). Bern: Peter Lang.
Grossen, M., Florez, D., & Lauvergeon, S. (2006). Les tests en pratiques : le discours des psychologues sur les conditions d’usage des tests [Tests in practice: the psychologists’ discourse about the conditions of use of tests]. Actualités Psychologiques (18), 93–111.
Gumperz, J. J. (1982). Discourse strategies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Gunnarsson, B. L., Linell, P., & Nordberg, B. (eds). (1997). The construction of professional discourse. London: Longman.
Heath, C., & Luff, P. (2000). Technology in action. Learning in doing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hermans, H. J. (2001). The dialogical self: Toward a theory of personal and cultural positioning. Culture & Psychology 7(3), 243–281.
Hermans, H. J.-M. (2002). The dialogical self as a society of mind. Theory and Psychology, 12(2), 147–160.
Hermans, H. J., & Kempen, H. J. G. (1993). The dialogical self. San Diego: Academic Press.
Hermans, H. J., & Dimaggio, G. (2007). Self, identity, and globalization in times of uncertainty: a dialogical analysis. American Psychological Association, 11(1), 31–61.
Hutchins, E., & Klausen, T. (1996). Distributed cognition in an airline cockpit. In Y. Engeström & D. Middleton (Eds.), Cognition and communication at work (pp. 15–34). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Joseph, I. (1994). Attention distribuée et attention focalisée. Les protocoles de coopération au PCC de la ligne A du RER [Distributed attention and focused attention. The cooperation procedures in the PCC of service A of the RER]. Sociologie du Travail, 4, 563–585.
Josephs, I. E. (1998). Do you know Ragnar Rommetveit? On dialogue and silence, poetry and pedantry, and cleverness and wisdom in psychology (an interview with Ragnar Rommetveit. Culture and Psychology, 4(2), 189–212.
Latour, B. (1996). On interobjectivity. Mind, Culture and Activity, 3(4), 228–245.
Lewin, K. (1951a). Field theory and experiment in social psychology. In D. Cartwright (Ed.), Field theory in social science. Selected theoretical papers. Kurt Lewin (pp. 130–169). New York: Harper & Row.
Lewin, K. (1951b). Defining the “field at a given time”. In D. Cartwright (Ed.), Field theory in social science. Selected theoretical papers. Kurt Lewin (pp. 43–58). New York: Harper & Row.
Light, P., & Butterworth, G. (Eds). (1992). Context and cognition: Ways of learning and knowing. London: Harvester Wheatsheaf.
Linell, P. (1998). Approaching dialogue: Talk, interaction and contexts in dialogical perspectives. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Linell, P. (2005). The written language bias in linguistics: Its nature, origins and transformations. London, New York: Routledge.
Linell, P. (2009). Rethinking language, mind, and world dialogically. Charlotte: Information Age Publishing.
Linell, P., & Marková, I. (1993). Acts in discourse: from monological speech acts to dialogical interacts. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 23(2), 173–195.
Linell, P., & Sarangi, S. (1998). Discourse across boundaries: On recontextualizations and the blending of voices in professional discourse. Text, 18, 143–157.
Mäkitalo, A. (2006). Effort on display: Unemployment and the interactional management of moral accountability. Symbolic Interaction, 29(4), 531–556.
Marková, I. (1990). A three-step process as a unit of analysis in dialogue. In I. Marková & K. Foppa (Eds.), The dynamics of dialogue (pp. 129–146). Hemel Hempstead: Harvester.
Marková, I. (1997). On two concepts of interaction. In M. Grossen & B. Py (Eds.), Pratiques sociales et médiations symboliques (pp. 23–44). Bern: Peter Lang.
Marková, I. (2003). Dialogicality and social representations. The dynamics of mind. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Marková, I. (2006). On “the inner alter” in dialogue. International Journal for Dialogical Science, 1(1), 125–147.
Marková, I., Graumann, C., & Foppa, K. (eds). (1995). Mutualities in dialogue. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Marková, I., Linell, P., Grossen, M., & Salazar Orvig, A. (2007). Dialogue in focus groups: Exploring socially shared knowledge. London: Equinox.
McHoul, A., Rapley, M., & Antaki, C. (2008). You gotta light? On the luxury of context for understanding talk in interaction. Journal of Pragmatics, 40, 42–54.
Mead, G. H. (1932). The physical thing. In The Philosophy of the present (pp. 119–139). Chicago: Open Court.
Mead, G. H. (1967). Mind, self and society (paperback ed.). Chicago: The Chicago University Press.
Mercer, N., & Littleton, K. (2007). Dialogue and the development of children’s thinking: A sociocultural approach. London: Routledge.
Morson, G. S., & Emerson, C. (1990). Mikhail Bakhtin. Creation of a prosaics. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Muller Mirza, N., & Perret-Clermont, A.-N. (Eds). (2009). Argumentation and education: Theoretical foundations and practices. New York: Springer.
Peräkylä, A. (2004). Two traditions of interaction research. British Journal of Social Psychology, 43(1), 1–20.
Peräkylä, A., Antaki, C., Vehviläinen, S., & Leudar, I. (2008). Conversation analysis and psychotherapy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Perret-Clermont, A.-N. (1980). Social interaction and cognitive development in children. New York: Academic Press.
Perret-Clermont, A.-N., Perret, J.-F., & Bell, N. (1991). The social construction of meaning and cognitive activity in elementary school children. In L. B. Resnick, J. M. Levine & S. D. Teasley (Eds.), Socially shared cognition (pp. 41–62). Washington: American Psychological Association.
Rojas-Drummond, S. M., Mazón, N., Fernandez, M., & Wegerif, R. (2006). Explicit reasoning, creativity and co-construction in primary school children’s collaborative activities. Journal of Thinking Skills and Creativity, 1(2), 84–94.
Rommetveit, R. (1976). On the architecture of intersubjectivity. In L. H. Strickland, K. J. Gergen & F. J. Aboud (Eds.), Social psychology in transition (pp. 163–175). New York: Plenum Press.
Rommetveit, R. (1992). Outlines of dialogically based social-cognitive approach to human cognition and communication. In A. H. Wold (Ed.), The dialogical alternative. Towards theories of language and minds (pp. 19–44). Oslo: Scandinavian University Press.
Rommetveit, R. (2003). On the role of “a psychology of the second person” in studies of meaning, language and mind. Mind, Culture & Activity, 10, 205–218.
Salazar Orvig, A. (1999). Les mouvements du discours [The movements of discourse]. Paris: L’Harmattan.
Salazar Orvig, A. (2005). Les facettes du dialogisme dans une discussion ordinaire [The facets of dialogism in an ordinary discussion]. In P. Haillet & G. Karmaoui (Eds.), Regards sur l’héritage de Mikhail Bakhtine (pp. 35–66). Amiens: Encrage.
Salazar Orvig, A., & Grossen, M. (2004). Représentations sociales et analyse de discours produit dans des focus groups: un point de vue dialogique [Social representations and analysis of discourses produced in focus-groups: a dialogical standpoint]. Bulletin de Psychologie, 57(3), 263–272.
Salazar Orvig, A., & Grossen, M. (2008). Le dialogisme dans l’entretien clinique [The dialogism of clinical interview]. Langage & Société, 123, 37–52.
Salgado, J., & Ferreira, T. (2004). Dialogical relationships as triads: Implications for the dialogical self theory. In P. Oles & H. Hermans (Eds.), The dialogical self: Theory and research (pp. 141–152). Lublin: Wydawnictwo.
Salgado, J., & Gonçalves, M. (2007). The dialogical self: Social, personal and (un)conscious. In J. Valsiner & A. Rosa (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of socio-cultural psychology (pp. 608–624). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Säljö, R. (1991). Piagetian controversies, cognitive competence, and assumptions about human communication. Educational Psychology Review, 3(2), 117–126.
Sarangi, S., & Roberts, C. (eds). (1999). Talk, work and institutional order: Discourse in medical, mediation and management settings. Berlin, New York: Mouton & de Gruyter.
Schegloff, E. A. (1992). In another context. In A. Duranti & C. Goodwin (Eds.), Rethinking context (pp. 191–228). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Shotter, J., & Billig, M. (1998). A Bakhtinian psychology: From out of the heads of individuals and into the dialogue between them. In M. Mayerfeld Bell & M. Gardiner (Eds.), Bakhtin and the human sciences (pp. 13–29). London: Sage.
Stern, D. (1995). The motherhood constellation. New York: Basic Books.
Stiles, W. B. (1992). Describing talk: A taxonomy of verbal response modes. London: Sage.
Thomas, W., & Znaniecki, F. (1981). The Polish peasant in Europe and America. In A. Furnham & M. Argyle (Eds.), The psychology of social situations. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
Todorov, T. (1984). Mikhail Bakhtin: The dialogical principle (W. Godzich, Trans.). Minneapolis: The University of Minnesota Press. (Original work published 1981)
Trognon, A., & Grusenmeyer, C. (1997). To resolve a technical problem through conversation. In L. B. Resnick, R. Säljö, C. Pontecorvo & B. Burge (Eds.), Discourse, tools, and reasoning. Essays on situation cognition (pp. 87–110). Berlin: Springer.
Valsiner, J. (1998). The guided mind: A sociogenetic approach to personality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Valsiner, J. (2002). Forms of dialogical relation and semiotic autoregulation within the self. Theory and Psychology, 12(2), 251–265.
Valsiner, J. (2005). Scaffolding within the structure of dialogical self: hierarchical dynamics of semiotic mediation. New Ideas in Psychology, 23, 197–206.
Vehviläinen, S. (2003). Preparing and delivering interpretations in psychoanalytic interaction. Text, 23(4), 573–606.
Voloshinov, Y. N. (1986). Marxism and the philosophy of language (L. Matejka & I.R. Titunik, Trans.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. (Original work published 1929).
Vygotsky, L. S. (1988). Thought and language. London: Cambridge University Press & MIT Press (Original work published 1934.)
Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning and identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Wertsch, J. (1991). Voices of the mind: A socio-cultural approach to mediated action. London: Harvester Wheatsheaf.
Wertsch, J. V., Minick, N., & Arns, F. J. (1984). The creation of context in joint problem sorving. In B. Rogoff & J. Lave (Eds.), Everyday cognition: Its development in social context (pp. 151–171). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Zittoun, T. (2006). Transitions. Developement through symbolic resources. Greenwich (CT): Information Age Publishing.
Acknowledgments
This article owes a lot to Ivana Marková, Per Linell and Anne Salazar Orvig with whom, from September to December 2003, I was involved in a research project supported by the International Programme for Advanced Studies, run by the Maison des Sciences de l’Homme Paris, in collaboration with the Columbia Institute for Scholars at Reid Hall, Paris, and the European Laboratory of Social Psychology (LEPS) of the Maison des Sciences de l’Homme. This project provided me many opportunities to discuss their conceptions of dialogism and to profit from their expertise. I also would like to thank Carlo Prevignano who gave me precious advices in the revision of a former version of this article.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Grossen, M. Interaction Analysis and Psychology: A Dialogical Perspective. Integr. psych. behav. 44, 1–22 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12124-009-9108-9
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12124-009-9108-9