Dealing with interruptions in collaborative tasks involves two important processes: managing the face of one’s partners and collaboratively reconstructing the topic. In an experiment, pairs were interrupted while narrating personal stories. The duration of the interruption and the conversational role of the target were manipulated. Listeners were more polite than narrators, and longer suspensions caused more effort in reinstatement than short suspensions, but participants were not more polite when suspensions were long.
Altmann, E.M., & Trafton, J.G. ( 2002). Memory for goals: An activation-based model. Cognitive Science, 26, 39-83.
2.
Bangerter, A., Clark, H.H., & Katz, A.R. ( 2004). Navigating joint projects in telephone conversations . Discourse Processes, 37, 1-23.
3.
Bavelas, J.B., Coates, L., & Johnson, T. ( 2000). Listeners as co-narrators. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 941-952.
4.
Boersma, P., & Weenink, D. ( 2007). Praat: Doing phonetics by computer (Version 4.5.26) [Computer program]. Retrieved May 8, 2007, from http://www.praat.org/
5.
Brown, P., & Levinson, S. ( 1987). Politeness: Some universals in language use. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
6.
Chevalley, E., & Bangerter, A. (in press). Suspending and reinstating joint activities with dialogue. Discourse Processes.
7.
Clark, H.H. ( 2006). Social actions, social commitments. In N. J. Enfield & S. C. Levinson (Eds.), Roots of human sociality: Culture, cognition and interaction (pp. 126-150). Oxford, UK: Berg .
8.
Gonzalez, V., & Mark, G. ( 2005, September). Managing currents of work: Multitasking among multiple collaborations. Paper presented at the proceedings of the Ninth European Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work, Paris.
9.
Goodwin, C. ( 1987). Forgetfulness as an interactive resource. Social Psychology Quarterly, 50, 115-130.
10.
Hodgetts, H.H., & Jones, D.M. ( 2006a). Interruption of the Tower of London task: Support for a goal-activation approach. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 135, 103-115.
11.
Hodgetts, H.H., & Jones, D.M. ( 2006b). Contextual cues aid recovery from interruption: The role of associative activation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 32, 1120-1132.
12.
Horton, W.S., & Gerrig, R.J. ( 2005). Conversational common ground and memory processes in language production. Discourse Processes, 40, 1-35.
13.
Perlow, L.A. ( 1999). The time famine: Toward a sociology of work time. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44, 57-81.
14.
Russell, A.W., & Schober, M.F. ( 1999). How beliefs about a partner’s goals affect referring in goal-discrepant conversations. Discourse Processes, 27, 1-33.
15.
Sacks, H., Schegloff, E.A., & Jefferson, G. ( 1974). A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking in conversation. Language, 50, 696-735.
16.
Semmer, N., Jacobshagen, N., & Meier, L.L. ( 2009). Illegitimate tasks as a source of stress. Manuscript submitted for publication.
