↓ Skip to main content

The intersection of turn-taking and repair: the timing of other-initiations of repair in conversation

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, March 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (86th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (73rd percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
9 X users
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
59 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
73 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The intersection of turn-taking and repair: the timing of other-initiations of repair in conversation
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, March 2015
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00250
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kobin H Kendrick

Abstract

The transitions between turns at talk in conversation tend to occur quickly, with only a slight gap of ∼100-300 ms between them. This estimate of central tendency, however, hides a wealth of complex variation, as a number of factors, such as the type of turns involved, have been shown to influence the timing of turn transitions. This article considers one specific type of turn that does not conform to the statistical trend, namely turns that deal with troubles of speaking, hearing, and understanding, known as other-initiations of repair (OIR). The results of a quantitative analysis of 169 OIRs in face-to-face conversation reveal that the most frequent cases occur after gaps of ∼700 ms. Furthermore, OIRs that locate a source of trouble in a prior turn specifically tend to occur after shorter gaps than those that do not, and those that correct errors in a prior turn, while rare, tend to occur without delay. An analysis of the transitions before OIRs, using methods of conversation analysis, suggests that speakers use the extra time (i) to search for a late recognition of the problematic turn, (ii) to provide an opportunity for the speaker of the problematic turn to resolve the trouble independently, and (iii) to produce visual signals, such as facial gestures. In light of these results, it is argued that OIRs take priority over other turns at talk in conversation and therefore are not subject to the same rules and constraints that motivate fast turn transitions in general.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 73 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 1%
Germany 1 1%
South Africa 1 1%
Unknown 70 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 20 27%
Student > Bachelor 7 10%
Researcher 6 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 8%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 5 7%
Other 15 21%
Unknown 14 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Linguistics 24 33%
Psychology 10 14%
Social Sciences 8 11%
Computer Science 4 5%
Neuroscience 3 4%
Other 7 10%
Unknown 17 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 14 September 2023.
All research outputs
#3,240,351
of 26,139,724 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#6,265
of 35,014 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#38,428
of 275,695 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#122
of 452 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,139,724 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 35,014 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 275,695 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 452 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its contemporaries.