Interaction Analysis and Teacher Cognition



This chapter discusses the role of interaction in understanding cognition, in particular conversation analysis (CA) and discourse analysis are compared to propose why applied CA is useful in the study of teacher cognition. The chapter makes a strong case for conversation analysis-for-teacher cognition and discusses teacher cognition and professional discourse, as well as key constructs in CA. This chapter demonstrates how the fine-grained, ‘up-close’ analysis offered by CA provides an in-depth understanding of what teachers think in a moment-by-moment interaction in their professional context; a concept termed as ‘cognition-in-interaction’ (Li, Social interaction and teacher cognition. Edinburgh University Press, 2017a).


Language teacher cognition Interaction Discourse analysis Conversation analysis 


  1. Ahmed, M. K. (1994). Speaking as cognitive regulation: A Vygotskian perspective on dialogic communication. In J. P. Lantolf & G. Appel (Eds.), Vygotskian approaches to second language research (pp. 157–171). Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation.Google Scholar
  2. Antaki, C. (2008). Discourse analysis and conversation analysis. In P. Alasuutari, L. Bickman, & J. Brannan (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of social research methods (pp. 431–446). London: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Antaki, C., Billig, M., Edwards, D., & Potter, J. (2003). Discourse analysis means doing analysis: A critique of six analytic shortcomings. Discourse Analysis On Line, 1(1). Retrieved from 
  4. Borg, S. (2006). Teacher cognition and language education: Research and practice. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
  5. Brazil, D. (1997). The communicative value of intonation in English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  6. Brazil, D. C. (1995). Classroom and spoken discourse. Centre for English language studies. Birmingham: The University of Birmingham.Google Scholar
  7. Copland, F. (2008). Deconstructing the discourse: Understanding the feedback event. In S. Garton & K. Richards (Eds.), Professional encounters in TESOL: Discourses of teachers in teaching (pp. 1–5). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  8. Coulthard, M. (1985). An introduction to discourse analysis (2nd ed.). Burnt Mill: Longman.Google Scholar
  9. Drew, P., & Heritage, J. (1992). Analyzing talk at work: An introduction. In P. Drew & J. Heritage (Eds.), Talk at work (pp. 3–65). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Drew, P., & Sorjonen, M.-L. (1997). Institutional dialogue. In T. v. Dijk (Ed.), Discourse: A multidisciplinary introduction. Volume 2: Discourse as social interaction in society. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  11. Duncan, M. R., & Cheyne, J. (2002). Private speech in young adults: Task difficulty, self-regulation, and psychological predication. Cognitive Development, 16, 889–906. Scholar
  12. Edward, A. D., & Westgate, D. P. G. (1994). Investigating classroom talk (2nd ed.). London and Washington, DC: Routledge and Falmer.Google Scholar
  13. Edwards, A., Gilroy, P., & Hartley, D. (2002). Re-thinking teacher education: Collaborating for uncertainty. London: Routledge and Falmer.Google Scholar
  14. Ellis, R. (1998). Discourse control and the acquisition-rich classroom. In W. A. Renandya & G. M. Jacobs (Eds.), Learners and language learning, Anthology (pp. 145–171). Singapore: SEAMO Regional Language Centre.Google Scholar
  15. Ellis, R. (2003). Task-based language learning and teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Furrow, D. (1984). Social and private speech at two years. Child Development, 55, 355–362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Garcia, A. C. (2013). Introduction to interaction: Understanding talk in formal and informal settings. London: Bloomsbury Publishing.Google Scholar
  18. Gray, J., & Morton, T. (2018). Social interaction and teacher identity. Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Heritage, J. (1997). Conversation analysis and institutional talk: Analyzing data. In D. Silverman (Ed.), Qualitative analysis: Issues of theory and method (pp. 161–182). London: Sage.Google Scholar
  20. Heritage, J. (1998). Conversation analysis and institutional talk: Analyzing distinctive turn-taking systems. In S. Cmejrková, J. Hoffmannová, O. Müllerová, & J. Svetlá (Eds.), Proceedings of the 6th International Congress of IADA (International Association for Dialog Analysis) (pp. 3–17). Tubingen: Niemeyer.Google Scholar
  21. Heritage, J. (2004). Conversation analysis and institutional talk: Analysing data. In D. Silverman (Ed.), Qualitative research: Theory, method and practice (pp. 222–245). London: Sage.Google Scholar
  22. Heritage, J. (2010). Conversation analysis: Practices and methods. In D. Silverman (Ed.), Qualitative sociology (3rd ed., pp. 208–230). London: Sage.Google Scholar
  23. Heritage, J. (2013). Language and social institutions: The conversation analytic view. Journal of Foreign Languages, 36(4), 2–26.Google Scholar
  24. Hutchby, I., & Wooffitt, R. (2008). Conversation analysis (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  25. Jefferson, G. (1986). Notes on “latency” in overlap onset. Human Studies, 9, 153–183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Jenks, C. J. (2014). Social interaction in second language chat rooms. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
  27. Kronk, C. M. (1994). Private speech in adolescents. Adolescence, 29, 781–804.Google Scholar
  28. Lantolf, J. P. (2000b). Introducing sociocultural theory. In J. P. Lantolf (Ed.), Sociocultural theory and second language learning (pp. 1–26). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  29. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning. Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Levinson, S. (1983). Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Li, L. (2013). The complexity of language teachers’ beliefs and practice: One EFL teacher’s theories. Language Learning Journal, 41(2), 175–191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Li, L. (2017a). Social interaction and teacher cognition. Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
  33. Malouf, R. (1995). Towards an analysis of multi-party discourse [Online]. Retrieved July 17, 2001, from
  34. Markee, N. (2004). Zones of interactional transition in ESL classes. The Modern Language Journal, 88, 583–596.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. McHoul, A. (1978). The organization of turns at formal talk in the classroom. Language in Society, 7, 183–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Mehan, H. (1979). Learning lessons. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Montgomery, M. (1986). Language and power: A critical review of ‘Studies in the Theory of Ideology’ by John B. Thompson. Media, Culture and Society, 8, 41–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Morton, T. (2012). Classroom talk, conceptual change and teacher reflection in bilingual science teaching. Teaching and Teacher Education, 28(1), 101–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Morton, T., & Gray, J. (2010). Personal practical knowledge and identity in lesson planning conferences on a pre-service TESOL course. Language Teaching Research, 14(3), 297–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Pomerantz, A. M. (1984). Agreeing and disagreeing with assessment: Some features of preferred/dispreferred turn shapes. In M. Atkinson & J. Heritage (Eds.), Structures of social action: Studies in conversation analysis (pp. 57–101). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  41. Potter, J., & Hepburn, A. (2005). Qualitative interviews in psychology: Problems and possibilities. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 2, 281–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Sacks, H. (1992). Lectures on conversation. 2 vols. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  43. Sacks, H., Schegloff, E. A., & Jefferson, G. (1974). A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation. Language, 50(4), 696–735.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Schegloff, E. A. (1968). Sequencing in conversational openings. American Anthropologist, 70, 1075–1095.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Schegloff, E. A. (1991). Reflection on talk and social structure. In D. Boden & D. H. Zimmerman (Eds.), Talk and social structure: Studies in ethnomethodology and conversation analysis. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  46. Schegloff, E. A. (1992). Repair after next turn: The last structurally provided defense of intersubjectivity in conversation. American Journal of Sociology, 97, 1295–1345.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Schegloff, E. A., Koshik, I., Jacoby, S., & Olsher, D. (2002). Conversation analysis and applied linguistics. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 22, 3–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Schegloff, E. A., & Sacks, H. (1973). Opening up closings. Semiotica, 7, 289–327.Google Scholar
  49. Schegloff, E. A., Jefferson, G., & Sacks, H. (1977). The preference for self-correction in the organization of repair in conversation. Language, 53, 361–382.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Seedhouse, P. (2004). The interactional architecture of the language classroom: A conversation analysis perspective. Malden, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  51. Seedhouse, P. (2005). Conversation analysis and language learning. Language Teaching, 38(4), 165–187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Seedhouse, P. (2011). Conversation analytic research into language teaching and learning. In E. Hinkel (Ed.), Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning (pp. 345–363). Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  53. Seedhouse, P., & Walsh, S. (2010). Learning a second language through classroom interaction. In P. Seedhouse, S. Walsh, & J. Chris (Eds.), Conceptualising ‘learning’ in applied linguistics (pp. 127–146). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Sert, O. (2015). Social interaction and L2 classroom discourse. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
  55. Sinclair, J., & Coulthard, M. (1975). Towards an analysis of discourse. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  56. Sinclair, J., & Coulthard, M. (1992). Towards an analysis of discourse. In M. Coulthard (Ed.), Advances in spoken discourse analysis (pp. 1–34). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  57. ten Have, P. (2007). Doing conversation analysis (2nd ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. van Lier, L. (1996). Interaction in the language curriculum: Awareness, autonomy and authenticity. New York: Longman.Google Scholar
  59. Vygotsky, L. S. (1986). Thought and language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  60. Walsh, S. (2002). Construction or obstruction: Teacher talk and learner involvement in the EFL classroom. Language Teaching Research, 6(1), 3–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Walsh, S. (2006). Investigating classroom discourse. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Walsh, S. (2011). Exploring classroom discourse: Language in action. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Walsh, S., & Li, L. (2013). Conversation as space for learning. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 23(2), 244–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Waring, H. Z. (2009). Moving out of IRF (initiation-response-feedback): A single case analysis. Language Learning, 59(4), 796–824.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Waring, H. Z. (2016). Theorizing pedagogical interaction: Insights from conversation analysis. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  66. Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Winsler, A., & Naglieri, J. A. (2003). Overt and covert verbal problem-solving strategies: Developmental trends in use, awareness, and relations with task performance in children age 5 to 17. Child Development, 74, 659–678.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Wong, J., & Waring, H. Z. (2010). Conversation analysis and second language pedagogy: A guide for ESL/EFL teachers. New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Graduate School of EducationUniversity of ExeterExeterUK

Personalised recommendations