Abstract
This paper examines an excerpt from a larger (televised) interview, wherein various married couples are asked to characterize their living situations in the aftermath of job loss and on the work of description and assessment by interview parties. It thus focuses on features of affiliation and disaffiliation and analyzes how both procedures work, particularly within an environment in which affiliated parties are engaged in attempting to figure out an "unpredictable" outcome of some (mutually experienced or experienceable) situation. In the excerpt, there are instances of both affiliation and disaffiliation. Using such conversation analytic structures as topic organization, story organization, preference structures, and distinguishing between content and structural affiliations, the interview excerpt is shown to contain a series of story stages, each of which is an element of the overall work of collaborative assessment. Within this assessment, parties make use of "content affiliations," wherein they reference their lived affiliation with one another, while at the same time, structuring their talk so as to disagree and disaffiliate with one another's stance. In contrast to such classical theorists as Durkheim, Simmel, Toennies and Cooley, who viewed affiliation as resulting from internal, emotive sources, or as Durkheim put it, saw this as being a non-directly measurable condition of "primary group" relationships, this report argues for the possibility of seeing affiliation as a performed, or achieved, activity. In this latter conception, one made evident through ethnomethodology and conversation analysis, affiliation - along with its counterpart, disaffiliation, are indeed external and measurable actions.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Atkinson, J.M. and Heritage, J. (1984). Topic organization.In J.M. Atkinson and J. Heritage (Eds.), Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis, pp. 165-166.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Boden, D. and Bielby, D. (1986). The way it was: Topical organization in elderly conversation.Language and Communication 6(1/2): 73-89.
Button, G. (1987). Moving out of closings.In G. Button and J. Lee.(Eds.), Talk and Social Organisation, pp. 101-151.Clevedon and Philadelphia: Multilingual Matters.
Button, G. and Casey, N. (1984). Generating topic: The use of topic initial elicitors.In J.M. Atkinson and J. Heritage (Eds.), Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis, pp. 167-190.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Cooley, C.H., Angell, R.C. and Carr, L.J. (1933/1951). Primary and non-primary groups.In A.M. Lee (Ed.), Readings in Sociology, pp. 70-78.New York: Barnes and Noble Press.
Durkheim, E. (1984). The Division of Labor in Society.Introduction by L. Coser.Translated by W.D. Halls. New York: The Free Press.
Goodwin, C. and Goodwin, M. (1982). Concurrent operations on talk: Notes on the interactive organization of assessments.Paper presented at the 77th Annual Meeting of the American Sociological Association, San Francisco: California.
Goodwin, C. (1984). Notes on story structure and the organization of participation.In J.M. Atkinson and J. Heritage (Eds.), Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis, pp. 225-246.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Jefferson, G. (1984). On stepwise transition from talk about a trouble to inappropriately nextpositioned matters.In J.M. Atkinson and J. Heritage (Eds.), Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis, pp. 191-222.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Jefferson, G., Sacks, H. and Schegloff, E. (1987). Notes on laughter in pursuit of intimacy.In G. Button and J. Lee (Eds.), Talk and Social Organisation, pp. 152-205.Clevedon and Philadelphia: Multilingual Matters.
Orletti, F. (1989). Topic organization in conversation.International Journal of the Sociology of Language 76: 75-85.
Pomerantz, A. (1978). Attributions of responsibility: Blamings.Sociology 12: 115-121.
Pomerantz, A. (1984a). Agreeing and disagreeing with assessments: Some features of preferred/ dispreferred turn shapes.In J.M. Atkinson and J. Heritage (Eds.), Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis, pp. 57-101.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Pomerantz, A. (1984b). Pursuing a response.In J.M. Atkinson and J. Heritage (Eds.), Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis, pp. 102-128.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Sacks, H. (1972a). An initial investigation of the usability of stories by children for doing sociology.In D. Sudnow (Ed.), Studies in Social Interaction, pp. 31-74.New York: Free Press.
Sacks, H. (1972b/1974). On the analyzability of stories by children.In R. Turner (Ed.), Ethnomethodology, pp. 216-232.Middlesex, England: Penguin.
Sacks, H. (1973/1987). On the preferences for agreement and contiguity in sequences in conversation.In G. Button and J. Lee (Eds.), Talk and Social Organisation, pp. 54-69.Clevedon and Philadelphia: Multilingual Matters.
Sacks, H. (1974). An analysis of the course of a joke's telling in conversation.In R. Bauman and J. Sherzer (Eds.), Explorations in the Ethnography of Speaking, pp. 337-353.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Sacks, H., Schegloff, E.A. and Jefferson, G. (1974). A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation.Language 50: 696-735.
Simmel, G. (1908/1993). The stranger.In C. Lemert (Ed.), Social Theory: The Multicultural and Classic Readings, pp. 200-204.Boulder, San Francisco, and Oxford: Westview Press.
Toennies, F. and Loomis, C. (1887/1951). Gemeinschaft and gesellschaft.In A.M. Lee (Ed.), Readings in Sociology.New York: Barnes and Noble Press.
West, C. and Garcia, A. (1988). Conversational shift work: A study of topical transitions between women and men.Social Problems 35(5): 551-575.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Conroy, T.M. “I Don't Want to Burst Your Bubble”: Affiliation and Disaffiliation in a Joint Accounting by Affiliated Pair Partners. Human Studies 22, 339–359 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1005452904364
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1005452904364