/ The playing of computer games in the home is ubiquitous in contemporary life. Research that examines young children’s computer use confirms that playing computer games is a dominant form of activity. While computer game playing has important social effects for children, how children accomplish their social activity during computer use is very much taken for granted in the game-playing literature. This article addresses young children’s computer game playing through a detailed analysis of two children’s interaction while playing a Wiggles game in their home. Conversation analysis is employed to describe and explicate the social accomplishment of playing the game through a sequential analysis of data. Discussion considers the local organization of the game, its occasioned complexity, and the management of identity-related activities during game playing. The study provides a description of the ways that social interaction accomplishes the children’s game playing.
Atkinson, J.M. and Heritage, J. ( 1999) ‘Jefferson’s Transcript Notation’, in A. Jaworski and N. Coupland (eds) The Discourse Reader, pp. 158-66. London : New York: Routledge.
2.
Australian Bureau of Statistics (2006) Children’s Participation in Cultural and Leisure Activities. Canberra: ABS.
3.
Carrington, V. ( 2001) ‘Emergent Home Literacies: A Challenge for Educators’ , The Australian Journal of Language and Literacy23(2): 88-100.
4.
Carrington, V. ( 2005) ‘The Uncanny, Digital Texts and Literacy’ , Language and Education19(6): 467-82.
5.
Clarke, D. and Duimering, P.R. ( 2006) ‘How Computer Gamers Experiences the Game Situation: A Behavioural Study’, ACM Computers in Entertainment4(3): 1-23.
6.
Clements, D. and Sarama, J. ( 2003) ‘Strip Mining for Gold: Research and Policy in Educational Technology - A Response to "Fool’s Gold"‘, Association for the Advancement of Computers in Education11(1): 7-69.
7.
Clift, R. ( 1991) ‘Meaning in Interaction: The Case of Actually’ , Language77(2): 245-91.
8.
Cordes, C. and Miller, E. (eds) (2000) Fool’s Gold: A Critical Look at Computers in Childhood. Alliance for Childhood. URL (accessed 24 August 2010): http://drupal6.allianceforchildhood.org/fools_gold
9.
Downes, T. ( 1999) ‘Children’s and Parents’ Discourses about Computers in the Home and School’, Convergence5(4): 104-11.
10.
Downes, T. ( 2002) ‘Blending Play, Practice and Performance: Children’s Use of the Computer at Home’, Journal of Educational Inquiry3(2): 21-34.
11.
Downes, T., Arthur, L. and Beecher, B. ( 2001) ‘Effective Learning Environments for Young Children using Digital Resources: An Australian Perspective’, Information Technology in Childhood Education Annual1(1): 139-53.
12.
Garfinkel, H. ( 1984) Studies in Ethnomethodology. Cambridge : Polity Press.
13.
Goodwin, C. ( 2003) ‘Pointing as Situated Practice’, in S. Kita (ed.) Pointing: Where Language, Culture and Cognition Meet, pp. 217-41. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
14.
Goodwin, M. ( 1990) He-Said-She-Said: Talk as Social Organization among Black Children. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
15.
Green, J., Franquiz, M. and Dixon, C. ( 1997) ‘The Myth of the Objective Transcript: Transcribing as a Situated Act’, TESOL Quarterly31(1): 172-6.
16.
Heritage, J. ( 1984) ‘A Change-of-State Token and Aspects of its Sequential Placement’, in J.M. Atkinson and J. Heritage (eds) Structures of Social Action , pp. 299-345. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
17.
Hutchby, I. and Wooffitt, R. ( 1998) Conversation Analysis. Malden, MA: Polity Press.
18.
Kafai, Y.B., Fishman, B.J., Bruckman, A.S. and Rockman, S. ( 2002) ‘Models of Educational Computing @Home: New Frontiers for Research on Technology in Learning’, Educational Technology Review10(2): 52-68.
19.
Kirriemuir, J. and McFarlane, A. ( 2004) Literature Review in Games and Learning. URL (accessed 26 August 2010): http://www.futurelab.org.uk/resources/documents/lit_reviews/Games_Review.pdf
20.
Linderoth, J., Lantz-Andersson, A. and Lindstrom, B. ( 2002) ‘Electronic Exaggerations and Virtual Worries: Mapping Research of Computer Games Relevant to the Understandings of Children’s Game Play’, Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood3(2): 226-50.
21.
Marsh, J. ( 2004) ‘The Techno-Literacy Practices of Young Children’ , Journal of Early Childhood Research2(1): 51-66.
22.
Marsh, J. ( 2005) ‘Ritual, Performance and Identity Construction: Young Children’s Engagement with Popular Culture and Media Texts’ , in J. Marsh (ed.) Popular Culture, New Media and Digital Literacy in Early Childhood, pp. 28-50. London and New York: RoutledgeFalmer.
23.
Plowman, L. and Stephen, C. ( 2003) ‘A Benign Addition? A Review of Research on ICT and Preschool Children’, Journal of Computer-Assisted Learning19(2): 145-58.
24.
Plowman, L. and Stephen, C. ( 2005) ‘Children, Play and Computers in Pre-School Education’ , British Journal of Educational Technology36(2): 145-57.
25.
Plowman, L. and Stephen, C. ( 2007) ‘Guided Interaction in Pre-School Settings’ , Journal of Computer Assisted Learning23(1): 14-26.
26.
Plowman, L., McPake, J. and Stephen, C. ( 2008) ‘The Technologisation of Childhood? Young Children and Technologies at Home’, Children and Societyhttp://www.3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/fulltext/121385522/HTMLSTART
27.
Plowman, L., McPake, J. and Stephen, C. ( 2008) ‘Just Picking it Up? Young Children Learning with Technology at Home’, Cambridge Journal of Education38(3): 303-19.
28.
Pomerantz, A. ( 1988) ‘Offering a Candidate Answer: An Information Seeking Strategy’, Communication Monographs55: 360-73.
29.
Psathas, G. ( 1990) Interaction Competence. Lanham, MD; London: University Press of America for International Institute for Ethnomethodology and Conversation Analysis.
30.
Rideout, V.J., Vandewater, E.A. and Wartella, E.A. ( 2003) Zero to Six: Electronic Media in the Lives of Infants, Toddlers and Preschoolers. Menlo Park, CA: Kaiser Family Foundation and the Children’s Digital Media Centre.
31.
Rogoff, B. ( 1990) Apprenticeship in Thinking: Cognitive Development in Social Context. New York: Oxford University Press.
32.
Sacks, H. ( 1995) Lectures on Conversation/Harvey Sacks (edited by Gail Jefferson; with an Introduction by Emanuel A. Schegloff). Oxford : Blackwell.
33.
Sacks, H., Schegloff, E.A. and Jefferson, G. ( 1974) ‘A Simplest Systematics for the Organization of Turn-Taking for Conversation’, Language50(4): 696-735.
34.
Schegloff, E.A. ( 1992) ‘On talk and Its Institutional Occasions’ , in P. Drew and J. Heritage (eds) Talk at Work: Interaction in Institutional Settings, pp. 101-34. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
35.
Schegloff, E. ( 2000) ‘On Granularity’, Annual Review of Sociology26: 715-20.
36.
Schegloff, E. ( 2007) ‘Categories in Action: Person-Reference and Membership Categorization’, Discourse Studies9(4): 433-61.
37.
Stephen, C., McPake, J., Plowman, L. and Berch-Heyman, S. ( 2008) ‘Learning from the Children: Exploring Preschool Children’s Encounters with ICT at Home’, Journal of Early Childhood Research6(2): 99-117.
38.
Wartella, E. and Jennings, N. ( 2000) ‘Children and Computers: New Technology - Old Concerns’ , Children and Computer Technology10(2): 31-43.
39.
Yelland, N. ( 2005) ‘The Future is Now: A Review of the Literature on the Use of Computers in Early Childhood Education (1994-2004)’, AACE Journal13(2): 201-32.
40.
Zevenbergen, R. and Logan, H. ( 2008) ‘Computer Use by Preschool Children: Rethinking Practice as Digital Natives Come to Preschool’, Australian Journal of Early Childhood33(1): 37-44.
