The Human Interaction Laboratory data session will meet on the 14th December 2017 in unit 2580, 200 Boston Ave. Medford, MA 02155 from 3-5pm. There is parking outside the building, please meet outside the lab on the second floor (follow the numbers around the corridor from on the second floor until you arrive at 2580.
Contact: email@example.com / 857-222-5992 for more information or if you need directions once you arrive.
Data: For this session we will be looking at video data collected by Dr. Kristen Bottema-Beutel during a team building workshop that was part of a counselor-in- training program at a sports summer camp in the Western United States. In this workshop, there are five teenagers participating, two of whom have disabilities and three of whom are typically developing. The group is engaging in an activity involving a ‘photo challenge’ where the group is presented with two laminated pages of photos taken in different locations throughout the camp. The challenge is to guess where at camp each photo was taken.
In general, our data session look at a variety of data from everyday conversations and interaction in more constrained and institutional contexts. If you have some data you’d like to bring to the session – please contact firstname.lastname@example.org.
The launch will be held in the Kreplick Conference Room, in the Psychology Department, 490 Boston Ave. Medford, MA 02155 from 9:45am-12:30 followed by lunch in the foyer of the Psychology building. Please RSVP here to make sure we order enough food and refreshments.
9:45: Coffee / biscuits outside the Kreplick Conference Room
10am to 10:45: Prof. J. P. De Ruiter: How psychologists should not study interaction.
10:45 to 11:30: Prof. Jonathan Potter: A discursive approach to psychological matters
11:30-12:15: Prof. Alexa Hepburn: Emotion in interaction: Identifying and responding to upset
12:30-1:30: lunch and discussion in the Psychology building foyer
Prof J.P. de Ruiter: How psychologists should not study interaction.
I will introduce the Human Interaction Lab and our distinguished speakers with a talk that argues how and why human interaction cannot be studied properly using the traditional experimental methods that have been successful in other areas of the cognitive sciences. Of the many problems with these methods, I will focus on two important ones: (a) the trade-off between experimental control and ecological validity, and (b) problems regarding the quantification of interactive behavior.
Prof. Jonathan Potter: A discursive approach to psychological matters
This interactive session will introduce and overview the discursive approach to psychological matters. It will illustrate the contrast from more familiar cognitivist perspectives by considering how and why notions of memory, attribution and attitude are respecified. This respecification occasions different ways of thinking about data, method and analysis and opens up different pathways to social impact. It will highlight specific issues about the role of interaction in the conduct of psychological research.
Prof. Alexa Hepburn: Emotion in interaction: Identifying and responding to upset
The traditional psychological notion of empathy invokes a relationship between two individuals who may possess differing capacities for tuning into the emotional states of the other. This notion of empathy captures something interesting, but it was not developed in a way that is sensitive to what empathy looks like in practice. To develop empathy as an analytic topic, Jonathan Potter and I explored the practices through which it is produced in a UK child protection helpline (see Hepburn & Potter, 2012 for an overview). One common practice we noticed involved call takers͛ formulations of the caller’s experiences, for example, when call takers describe a caller’s experience or emotional state, there are certain things that they attend to, the most obvious being their lack of direct access to them, e.g. ͚’this must be very upsetting for you’. In this paper, I explore responses to upset in a further two contrasting domains – a call between two sisters, and a therapeutic consultation. Analysis will show how interactants in these different environments claim and display access to one another’s experiences, and what this can tell us about the relationship between empathic formulations and the institutional task at hand.
Hepburn, A. & Potter, J. (2012). Crying and crying responses. In A. Peräkylä & M-L. Sorjonen (Eds). Emotion in interaction (pp. 194-210). Oxford: Oxford University Press.