Interaction Analysis as an Embodied and Interactive Process: Multimodal, Co-operative, and Intercorporeal Ways of Seeing
- PDF / 1,394,867 Bytes
- 26 Pages / 439.37 x 666.142 pts Page_size
- 105 Downloads / 214 Views
Interaction Analysis as an Embodied and Interactive Process: Multimodal, Co‑operative, and Intercorporeal Ways of Seeing Video Data as Complementary Professional Visions Julia Katila1 · Sanna Raudaskoski1
© The Author(s) 2020
Abstract The analysis of video-recorded interaction consists of various professionalized ways of seeing participant behavior through multimodal, co-operative, or intercorporeal lenses. While these perspectives are often adopted simultaneously, each creates a different view of the human body and interaction. Moreover, microanalysis is often produced through local practices of sense-making that involve the researchers’ bodies. It has not been fully elaborated by previous research how adopting these different ways of seeing human behavior influences both what is seen from a video and how it is seen, as well as the way the interpretation of the data ultimately unfolds in the interaction between researchers. In this article, we provide a theoretical-methodological discussion of the microanalytic research process. We explore how it differs from “seeing” affect in interaction either as a co-operative and multimodal action or as an intercorporeal experience. First, we introduce the multimodal conversation analytic, co-operative, and intercorporeal approaches to microanalysis. Second, we apply and compare these practices to a video-recorded interaction of a romantic couple. Furthermore, we examine a video-recorded episode of us, the researchers, reflecting on our analytic observations about this interaction. We suggest that adopting a multimodal and co-operative perspective constructs affect as co-produced and displayed through observable action, while an intercorporeal perspective produces affect as an embodied and experienced phenomenon. While the former enables locating affect in a specific moment and identifiable body parts, the latter facilitates recognizing the experienced side of affect. These different modes of professional vision complement one another in capturing affect in interaction while being fundamentally used in local interactions between the researchers. Keywords Ethnomethodology · Microanalysis · Affect · Intercorporeality · Co-operative action · Multimodal conversation analysis · Researcher’s professional vision
Extended author information available on the last page of the article
13
Vol.:(0123456789)
J. Katila, S. Raudaskoski
Introduction In this study, we propose that interaction analysis is based on a set of theories about the human body and embodied interaction that are manifested in various professional methods of seeing (Goodwin 1994; Goodwin and Goodwin 1996). The field surrounding the microanalysis of video-recorded interactions involves various methodological practices—ways of professional vision—or “socially organized ways of seeing and understanding events that are answerable to the distinctive interests of a particular social group” (Goodwin 1994: 606). We still know relatively little about how selecting a specific type of professional vision influences the
Data Loading...
