Interruption (speech)

Last updated

An interruption is a speech action when one person breaks in to interject while another person is talking. Linguists, social psychologists, anthropologists, and sociologists are among the social scientists who have studied and identified patterns of interruption that may differ by gender, social status, race/ethnicity, culture, and political orientation.

Contents

Turn-taking and overlaps

Harvey Sacks, the sociologist who launched the field of conversation analysis, worked with linguist Emanuel Schegloff and Gail Jefferson in the 1970s to analyze how turn-taking was organized in speech events such as everyday conversations. [1] Speech events are organized so that only one person speaks at a time and to provide for orderly ways to change speakers. Sacks et al. thought that the process of turn-taking is subconscious. [2]

Overlaps occur when two or more speakers talk simultaneously.

Types of interruptions

Communication analyst Julia A. Goldberg uses conversation analysis to define three types of conversational interruptions. Relationally neutral interruptions are interjections by the listener that seek to repair, repeat, or clarify something the speaker just said. During this type of interruption, the interrupter does not intend to exert power over the speaker, or to establish rapport with the speaker. The act of interruption itself is understood as neutral in this instance. Another type of interruption defined by Goldberg is the power interruption, where the interrupter breaks in and cuts off the speaker as a way to display some social power. Power interruptions are understood as acts of conflict and competition, [3] and are viewed as rude, hostile, disrespectful, and/or uncaring about the speaker and/or what the speaker is saying. A rapport interruption is designed to display mutuality and generally conveys the impression that the interrupter understands and empathizes with the speaker and/or the content of the speech, and is interpreted as collaborative and cooperative. [4]

Power interruptions are also analyzed by Zimmerman and West, sociologists who note that the people who seek to be socially dominant exert their power over others through interrupting their speech. Zimmerman and West also analyzed how sex roles shape interruption patterns. [5] Why participants interrupt each other might be an incentive for sociolinguists, or sometimes psychologists, to investigate this issue. One may begin to say something but suddenly, someone else interrupts to finish the sentence instead or holding the floor to say another idea without giving an opportunity to let others finish what they want to say. This is frustrating even the first speaker's sentence or thought goes along with the interrupter's. [6] [7]

Gender and interruption patterns

Since the late-1970s, social scientists have studied the effect gender has on interruption patterns and other components of verbal communication. The findings of these studies are mixed, with some finding gender differences, while others did not. Among those that found gender differences are sociologists Don Zimmerman and Candace West, who used male dominance theory to claim that men interrupted women to assert their social dominance over women. Zimmerman and West's work discovered that interruptions were more evenly distributed in conversations involving same-sex speakers, while in cross-sex interactions, men were much more likely to interrupt women. [8] [5] Zhao and Gantz analyzed fictional TV shows to claim that male characters used disruptive interruptions more than female characters, while female characters more often used cooperative interruptions. They note, however, that the apparent gender differences in interruption patterns are affected by differences in social status among the TV characters. [9] Goldberg notes that when conversational context and content are analyzed, interruptions may be seen as power displays, rapport displays, or as neutral acts that may or may not be shaped by the gender of the speaker. [4] Linguist Makri-Tsilipakou discovered that men and women use "simultaneous speech" at about the same rate, but the sexes differ as to their interpretation of the meaning of the interruption. Women use simultaneous speech as a sign of support and agreement, while men use it either as support for the other's speech or to dissent from other speakers or from their viewpoint. [10] Drass, a social psychologist, found that gender identity, as separate from biological sex, was an important variable, with persons who were more male-identified being more likely to interrupt than persons who were more female-identified.

Conversely, a study by Murray and Covelli used Zimmerman and West's coding strategies on their own dataset of conversations to find that women interrupted men more often than men interrupted women. [11] According to James and Clarke, this pattern is especially evident in conversational situations where women felt more expertise, and thus may have felt that their interruptions were more legitimate. [12]

Manterrupting

The term manterrupting was coined in early 2015 by Jessica Bennett in an article that appeared in Time. [13] Bennett defines the term as "[u]nnecessary interruption of a woman by a man." During the 2016 American presidential debates, the term was applied to candidate Donald Trump, who interrupted Hillary Clinton dozens of times during the first and second debates. [14]

Status and interruption patterns

Interruptions work as a status-organizing cue. [15] In other words, conversational participants use cues such as perceptions of prestige, power, social class, gender, race and age, to organize small-group hierarchies. Interruption patterns differ by social status, with persons of higher social status, such as belonging to a social group who has more prestige or power, interrupting persons with lower status. [16] Jacobi and Schweers analyzed transcripts of oral arguments made before the U.S. Supreme Court to find that senior justices interrupted their junior colleagues more frequently than the reverse. [17] Kollock et al. studied conversations among couples, including male couples, female couples, and mixed sex couples. They found that partners who were considered to have more social power interrupted their partners more often, regardless of the gender composition of the dyad. [16] In TV shows, characters who are lower in the status hierarchy are scripted to display a "sense of defiance" that allows them to interrupt more aggressively than persons who hold a mid-level status. [9] A study of interviews between physicians and patients found that physicians, who are considered to hold higher status than their patients in terms of prestige, are much more likely to interrupt their patients, regardless of the sex of the patient or the physician. Patients interrupted senior physicians at a lower rate than they interrupted doctors who were in training, indicating that the senior physicians are regarded as having a higher status than their junior colleagues. [18] In contrast, a study of physician-patient interactions among six different statuses, from low to high, indicated that patients tended to interrupt physicians more than the reverse, and that high and low status physicians did not differ in the number of times that they interrupted their patients. This study, by Irish and Hall, noted that status thus appears to be less of an indicator of the likelihood of interruptions among physicians and patients. [19]

In addition to social status affecting interruption patterns, interruptions also affect social status. In a study of mixed-sex and same-sex dyads, Farley discovered that the interrupters gained social status after they interrupted, while those who were interrupted lost social status. This study also found that people who interrupted also lost in terms of likeability. [20] To note, culture is influential in communication; participants of the same culture may share the same beliefs regarding how-to-act when interacting with each other. It has been noticed that thorough interaction depends on shared understanding of behavioral basis. Furthermore, cross-cultural disparity in turn-taking is potential problem in communication. [21]

Race/ethnicity and interruption patterns

Don Zimmerman and Candace West also claim in their study that whites interrupt blacks as a strategy to exert their power and dominance. [5]

Cultural differences

Interruptions, and how people interpret interruptions, differ by culture and language. Makri-Tsilpakou notes that some languages and cultures have higher tolerance for simultaneous talk, and that interpretations of interruptions may differ depending on cultural context. [22]

Political orientation

Political orientation, e.g. where a person falls on the conservative to liberal political continuum, also shapes the likelihood that people will interrupt others or will be interrupted themselves. Jacobi and Schweers, in their study of transcripts of oral arguments made before the U.S. Supreme Court, found that conservative justices and advocates interrupt more often than liberals. [17]

Related Research Articles

Sociolinguistics is the descriptive study of the effect of any or all aspects of society, including cultural norms, expectations, and context, on language and the ways it is used. It can overlap with the sociology of language, which focuses on the effect of language on society. Sociolinguistics overlaps considerably with pragmatics and is closely related to linguistic anthropology.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Politeness</span> Practical application of good manners or etiquette so as not to offend others

Politeness is the practical application of good manners or etiquette so as not to offend others and to put them at ease. It is a culturally defined phenomenon, and therefore what is considered polite in one culture can sometimes be quite rude or simply eccentric in another cultural context.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Conversation</span> Interactive communication between two or more people

Conversation is interactive communication between two or more people. The development of conversational skills and etiquette is an important part of socialization. The development of conversational skills in a new language is a frequent focus of language teaching and learning. Conversation analysis is a branch of sociology which studies the structure and organization of human interaction, with a more specific focus on conversational interaction.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Deborah Tannen</span> American sociolinguist (born 1945)

Deborah Frances Tannen is an American author and professor of linguistics at Georgetown University in Washington, D.C. Best known as the author of You Just Don't Understand, she has been a McGraw Distinguished Lecturer at Princeton University and was a fellow at the Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences following a term in residence at the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton, NJ.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Conversation analysis</span> Approach to the study of social interaction

Conversation analysis (CA) is an approach to the study of social interaction that empirically investigates the mechanisms by which humans achieve mutual understanding. It focuses on both verbal and non-verbal conduct, especially in situations of everyday life. CA originated as a sociological method, but has since spread to other fields. CA began with a focus on casual conversation, but its methods were subsequently adapted to embrace more task- and institution-centered interactions, such as those occurring in doctors' offices, courts, law enforcement, helplines, educational settings, and the mass media, and focus on multimodal and nonverbal activity in interaction, including gaze, body movement and gesture. As a consequence, the term conversation analysis has become something of a misnomer, but it has continued as a term for a distinctive and successful approach to the analysis of interactions. CA and ethnomethodology are sometimes considered one field and referred to as EMCA.

Politeness theory, proposed by Penelope Brown and Stephen Levinson, centers on the notion of politeness, construed as efforts to redress the affronts to a person's self-esteems or face in social interactions. Notable concepts include positive and negative face, the face threatening act (FTA), strategies surrounding FTAs and factors influencing the choices of strategies.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Rudeness</span> Display of disrespect

Rudeness is a display of actual or perceived disrespect by not complying with the social norms or etiquette expected within a relationship, social group, or culture. Social norms are established as the essential guidelines of normally accepted behavior within a given context, and individuals often establish personal boundaries to meet their own needs and desires within smaller settings, such as friendships. To be unwilling to align one's behavior with these norms known to the general population of what is socially acceptable is to be rude. These norms may resemble a sort of "unspoken law", with social repercussions or rewards for violators or advocates, respectively.

Communication accommodation theory (CAT) is a theory of communication, developed by Howard Giles, concerning "(1) the behavioral changes that people make to attune their communication to their partner, (2) the extent to which people perceive their partner as appropriately attuning to them". This concept was later applied to the field of sociolinguistics, in which linguistic accommodation or simply accommodation is the process of individuals adapting their style of speaking to become more like the style of their conversational partners.

The doctor–patient relationship is a central part of health care and the practice of medicine. A doctor–patient relationship is formed when a doctor attends to a patient's medical needs and is usually through consent. This relationship is built on trust, respect, communication, and a common understanding of both the doctor and patients' sides. The trust aspect of this relationship goes is mutual: the doctor trusts the patient to reveal any information that may be relevant to the case, and in turn, the patient trusts the doctor to respect their privacy and not disclose this information to outside parties.

Research into the many possible relationships, intersections and tensions between language and gender is diverse. It crosses disciplinary boundaries, and, as a bare minimum, could be said to encompass work notionally housed within applied linguistics, linguistic anthropology, conversation analysis, cultural studies, feminist media studies, feminist psychology, gender studies, interactional sociolinguistics, linguistics, mediated stylistics, sociolinguistics, and feminist language reform and media studies.

Complimentary language is a speech act that caters to positive face needs. Positive face, according to Brown and Levinson, is "the positive consistent self-image or 'personality' claimed by interactions". Many studies examine complimentary language in relation to gender because of the noticeable differences in compliment topic, explicitness, and response depending on gender of the speaker as well as the gender of the addressee. Analysts use these studies to demonstrate their theories about inherent differences between the genders and the societal impact of gender roles.

LGBT linguistics is the study of language as used by members of LGBT communities. Related or synonymous terms include lavender linguistics, advanced by William Leap in the 1990s, which "encompass[es] a wide range of everyday language practices" in LGBT communities, and queer linguistics, which refers to the linguistic analysis concerning the effect of heteronormativity on expressing sexual identity through language. The former term derives from the longtime association of the color lavender with LGBT communities. "Language", in this context, may refer to any aspect of spoken or written linguistic practices, including speech patterns and pronunciation, use of certain vocabulary, and, in a few cases, an elaborate alternative lexicon such as Polari.

Interactional sociolinguistics is a subdiscipline of linguistics that uses discourse analysis to study how language users create meaning via social interaction. It is one of the ways in which linguists look at the intersections of human language and human society; other subfields that take this perspective are language planning, minority language studies, quantitative sociolinguistics, and sociohistorical linguistics, among others. Interactional sociolinguistics is a theoretical and methodological framework within the discipline of linguistic anthropology, which combines the methodology of linguistics with the cultural consideration of anthropology in order to understand how the use of language informs social and cultural interaction. Interactional sociolinguistics was founded by linguistic anthropologist John J. Gumperz. Topics that might benefit from an Interactional sociolinguistic analysis include: cross-cultural miscommunication, politeness, and framing.

Power and dominance-submission are two key dimensions of relationships, especially close relationships in which parties rely on one another to achieve their goals and as such it is important to be able to identify indicators of dominance.

The social construction of gender is a theory in the humanities and social sciences about the manifestation of cultural origins, mechanisms, and corollaries of gender perception and expression in the context of interpersonal and group social interaction. Specifically, the social construction of gender theory stipulates that gender roles are an achieved "status" in a social environment, which implicitly and explicitly categorize people and therefore motivate social behaviors.

The Japanese language has some words and some grammatical constructions associated with men or boys, while others are associated with women or girls. Such differences are sometimes called "gendered language". In Japanese, speech patterns associated with women are referred to as onna kotoba or joseigo, and those associated with men are referred to as danseigo.

In linguistics, a backchanneling during a conversation occurs when one participant is speaking and another participant interjects responses to the speaker. A backchannel response can be verbal, non-verbal, or both. Backchannel responses are often phatic expressions, primarily serving a social or meta-conversational purpose, such as signifying the listener's attention, understanding, sympathy, or agreement, rather than conveying significant information. Examples of backchanneling in English include such expressions as "yeah", "OK", "uh-huh", "hmm", "right", and "I see".

In psychology, sociology and gender studies, "doing gender" is the idea that gender, rather than being an innate quality of individuals, is a social construct that actively surfaces in everyday human interaction. This term was used by Candace West and Don Zimmerman in their article "Doing Gender", published in 1987 in Gender and Society. According to this paper, an individual's performance of gender is intended to construct gendered behavior as naturally occurring. This façade furthers a system through which individuals are judged in terms of their failure or success to meet gendered societal expectations, called the accountability structure. The concept of doing gender was later expanded in the book Doing Gender, Doing Difference, edited by Sarah Fenstermaker and Candace West.

Judith Lorber is professor emerita of sociology and women’s studies at The CUNY Graduate Center and Brooklyn College of the City University of New York. She is a foundational theorist of social construction of gender difference and has played a vital role in the formation and transformation of gender studies. She has more recently called for a de-gendering of the social world.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Turn-taking</span> Type of organization in conversation and discourse

Turn-taking is a type of organization in conversation and discourse where participants speak one at a time in alternating turns. In practice, it involves processes for constructing contributions, responding to previous comments, and transitioning to a different speaker, using a variety of linguistic and non-linguistic cues.

References

  1. ↑ Sacks, Harvey; Schegloff, Emanuel A.; Jefferson, Gail (1974). "A Simplest Systematics for the Organization of Turn-Taking for Conversation". Language. 50 (4): 696–735. doi:10.2307/412243. hdl: 11858/00-001M-0000-002C-4337-3 . JSTOR   412243.
  2. ↑ Cantrell, Lucy. 2013-14. "The Power of Rapport: An Analysis of the Effects of Interruptions and Overlaps in Casual Conversation." Innervate 6: 74-85. Accessed 03-11-18 at https://www.nottingham.ac.uk/english/documents/innervate/13-14/06-lucy-cantrell-q33103-pp-74-85.pdf
  3. ↑ Cf. Dorschel, Andreas, "Ins Wort fallen. Figuren der Unterbrechung." Merkur 73 (2019), no. 4, pp. 37–46 (preview)
  4. 1 2 Goldberg, Julia A. (1990). "Interrupting the discourse on interruptions". Journal of Pragmatics. 14 (6): 883–903. doi:10.1016/0378-2166(90)90045-f.
  5. 1 2 3 Zimmerman, Don. H., and Candace West. 1996. "Sex Roles, Interruptions and Silences in Conversation." Amsterdam Studies in the Theory and History of Linguistic Science 4: 211-236.
  6. ↑ Riyadh, Eman, Adeeb,& Amthal Mohammed Abbas(2019)" Sex-and Age-Based Approach to the Study of Interruption in “The Kings of Summer” Movie and “Pretty Little Liars” TV Series: A Case of Same-Sex Teenage Interactions". Journal of International Journal of English Linguistics.Vol.9,pp.229-236. https://doi.org/10.5539/ijel.v9n2p229
  7. ↑ Adeeb, Eman Riyadh; Abbas, Amthal Mohammed (2019). "Sex- and Age-Based Approach to the Study of Interruption in "The Kings of Summer" Movie and "Pretty Little Liars" TV Series: A Case of Same-Sex Teenage Interactions". International Journal of English Linguistics. 9 (2): 229. doi: 10.5539/ijel.v9n2p229 .
  8. ↑ West, Candace (1979-06-01). "Against Our Will: Male Interruptions of Females in Cross-Sex Conversation*". Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences. 327 (1): 81–96. Bibcode:1979NYASA.327...81W. doi:10.1111/j.1749-6632.1979.tb17755.x. ISSN   1749-6632. S2CID   146801314.
  9. 1 2 Zhao, Xiaoquan; Gantz, Walter (2003-06-01). "Disruptive and Cooperative Interruptions in Prime-Time Television Fiction: The Role of Gender, Status, and Topic". Journal of Communication. 53 (2): 347–362. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2003.tb02595.x. ISSN   1460-2466.
  10. ↑ Makri-Tsilipakou, Marianthi (1994-04-01). "Interruption revisited: Affiliative vs. disaffiliative intervention". Journal of Pragmatics. 21 (4): 401–426. doi:10.1016/0378-2166(94)90012-4. ISSN   0378-2166.
  11. ↑ Murray, Stephen O.; Covelli, Lucille H. (1988). "Women and men speaking at the same time". Journal of Pragmatics. 12 (1): 103–111. doi:10.1016/0378-2166(88)90022-7.
  12. ↑ James, Deborah, and Sandra Clarke. 1993. Pp. 231-280 in Gender and conversational analysis. Edited by Deborah Tannen. New York: Oxford University Press.
  13. ↑ "How Not to Be 'Manterrupted' in Meetings". Time. Retrieved 2018-03-11.
  14. ↑ Adamczyk, Alicia (October 10, 2016). "Donald Trump's Manterruptions Continue Uninterrupted at Second Presidential Debate". Money.com . Archived from the original on May 14, 2021. Retrieved 2018-03-11.
  15. ↑ Farley, Sally D.; Ashcraft, Amie M.; Stasson, Mark F.; Nusbaum, Rebecca L. (2010-12-01). "Nonverbal Reactions to Conversational Interruption: A Test of Complementarity Theory and the Status/Gender Parallel". Journal of Nonverbal Behavior. 34 (4): 193–206. doi:10.1007/s10919-010-0091-0. hdl: 11603/4031 . ISSN   0191-5886. S2CID   146288020.
  16. 1 2 Kollock, Peter; Blumstein, Philip; Schwartz, Pepper (1985). "Sex and Power in Interaction: Conversational Privileges and Duties". American Sociological Review. 50 (1): 34–46. CiteSeerX   10.1.1.63.4385 . doi:10.2307/2095338. JSTOR   2095338.
  17. 1 2 Jacobi, Tonja; Schweers, Dylan (2017-10-24). "Justice, Interrupted: The Effect of Gender, Ideology and Seniority at Supreme Court Oral Arguments". SSRN   2933016.{{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires |journal= (help)
  18. ↑ Menz, Florian, and Ali Al-Roubaie. 2008. "Interruptions, status and gender in medical interviews: the harder you brake, the longer it takes." Discourse & Society 19(5): 645-666.
  19. ↑ Irish, J. T.; Hall, J. A. (September 1995). "Interruptive patterns in medical visits: the effects of role, status and gender". Social Science & Medicine. 41 (6): 873–881. doi:10.1016/0277-9536(94)00399-E. ISSN   0277-9536. PMID   8571159.
  20. ↑ Farley, Sally D. (2008-12-01). "Attaining Status at the Expense of Likeability: Pilfering Power Through Conversational Interruption". Journal of Nonverbal Behavior. 32 (4): 241–260. doi:10.1007/s10919-008-0054-x. hdl: 11603/4034 . ISSN   0191-5886. S2CID   55832517.
  21. ↑ Riyadh, Eman, Adeeb,& Amthal Mohammed Abbas(2019)" Sex-and Age-Based Approach to the Study of Interruption in “The Kings of Summer” Movie and “Pretty Little Liars” TV Series: A Case of Same-Sex Teenage Interactions". Journal of International Journal of English Linguistics.Vol.9,pp.229-236. https://doi.org/10.5539/ijel.v9n2p229
  22. ↑ Makri-Tsilipakou, Marianthi (2015). "Interruption". The International Encyclopedia of Language and Social Interaction. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. pp. 1–7. doi:10.1002/9781118611463.wbielsi088. ISBN   9781118611463.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.