This study explores the efficacy of keystroke logging as a method to qualitatively investigate the synchronous processes of discursive interaction through mobile devices as individuals go about their everyday lives. Heeding cautions from Boase (2013) concerning software variability across mobile technologies, as well as challenges from Ørmen and Thorhauge (2015) to use log data for qualitative research, our study offers one such methodological roadmap for observing—from the software side—the complex entanglements of humans and mobile technologies as they engage in mediated discourse. Our study draws upon keystroke analysis from the tradition of writing process research (Leijten & van Waes, 2013; Wengelin, 2006), as well as posthumanist methodologies for observing cybernetic interactions (Giddings, 2014), and extends Farman’s (2012) argument that asynchronous forms of mobile communication, such as text messaging, are performatively synchronous, since interlocutors are pulled toward embodied copresence via the mediated space. In doing so, we present a preliminary study of methods for directly observing how discursive processes manifest in-the-moment as a complex flow between human, machinic, and spatial components in a network assemblage.
BaymN. K.ZhangY.LinM. (2004). Social interactions across media. New Media & Society, 6(3), 299–318.
5.
BoaseJ. (2013). Implications of software-based mobile media for social research. Mobile Media & Communication, 1, 57–62.
6.
CuiD. (2015). Beyond “connected presence”: Multimedia mobile instant messaging in close relationship management. Mobile Media & Communication, 4, 19–36.
7.
De Souza e SilvaA. (2013). Location-aware mobile technologies: Historical, social and spatial approaches. Mobile Media & Communication, 1, 116–121.
8.
EkmanU. (2015). Complexity of the ephemeral – Snap video chats. Empedocles, 5(1–2), 91–101.
9.
ELAN (Version 4.8.1) [Computer software]. Nijmegen, the Netherlands: The Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics. Retrieved from http://tla.mpi.nl/tools/tla-tools/elan/
10.
FarmanJ. (2012). Mobile interface theory: Embodied space and locative media. New York, NY: Routledge.
11.
GiddingsS. (2014). Gameworlds: Virtual media and children’s everyday play. New York, NY: Bloomsbury.
12.
HallJ. A.BaymN. K.MiltnerK. M. (2014). Put down that phone and talk to me: Understanding the roles of mobile phone norm adherence and similarity in relationships. Mobile Media & Communication, 2, 134–153.
13.
HayesJ. R. (2012). Modeling and remodeling writing. Written Communication, 29, 369–388.
14.
HumphreysL. (2010). Mobile social networks and urban public space. New Media & Society, 12, 763–778.
15.
HumphreysL. (2012). Connecting, coordinating, cataloguing: Communicative practices on mobile social networks. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 56, 494–510.
16.
JanssenD.Van WaesL.Van den BerghH. (1996). Effects of thinking aloud on writing processes. In LevyC. M.RansdellS. (Eds.), The science of writing: Theories, individual differences, and applications (pp. 233–250). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
17.
LaursenD. (2005). Please reply! The replying norm in adolescent SMS communication. In HarperR.PalenL.TaylorA. (Eds.), The inside text: Social, cultural, and design perspectives on SMS (pp. 53–73). Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Springer.
18.
LausbergH.SloetjesH. (2009). Coding gestural behavior with the NEUROGES-ELAN system. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 41, 841–849.
19.
LeijtenM.Van WaesL. (2013). Keystroke logging in writing research: Using Inputlog to analyze and visualize writing processes. Written Communication, 30, 358–392.
20.
LeijtenM.Van WaesL.SchriverK.HayesJ. R. (2014). Writing in the workplace: Constructing documents using multiple digital sources. Journal of Writing Research, 5, 285–337.
21.
Leroi-GourhanA. (1993). Gesture and speech (BergerA. B. Trans.). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
22.
LewisC.FabosB. (2005). Instant messaging, literacies, and social identities. Reading Research Quarterly, 40, 470–501.
23.
LingR. (2008). New tech, new ties: How mobile communication is reshaping social cohesion. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
24.
LingR.YttriB. (2001). Hyper-coordination via mobile phones in Norway. In KatzJ. E.AakhusM. A. (Eds.), Perpetual contact: Mobile communication, private talk, public performance (pp. 139–169). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
25.
MihailidisP. (2014). A tethered generation: Exploring the role of mobile phones in the daily life of young people. Mobile Media & Communication, 2, 58–72.
26.
ØrmenJ.ThorhaugeA. M. (2015). Smartphone log data in a qualitative perspective. Mobile Media & Communication, 3, 335–350.
27.
RStudio (v0.98b) [Computer software]. Boston, MA: RStudio, Inc. Retrieved from http://www.rstudio.com/
28.
SpiliotiT. (2011). Beyond genre: Closings and relational work in text messaging. In ThurlowC.MroczekK. (Eds.), Digital discourse: Language in the new media (pp. 67–85). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
29.
StieglerB. (2008). Technics and time, 2: Disorientation (S. Barker, Trans., 1st ed.). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
30.
TaggC. (2012). Discourse of text messaging. London, UK: Continuum.
ThurlowC.LengelL.TomicA. (2008). Computer mediated communication: Social interaction and the Internet. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
33.
Van WaesL.LeijtenM.QuinlanT. (2010). Reading during sentence composing and error correction: A multilevel analysis of the influences of task complexity. Reading and Writing, 23, 803–834.
34.
Van WaesL.LeijtenM.van HorenbeeckE.PauwaertT. (2012, July). A generic XML-structure for logging human computer interaction. Paper presented at the 13th International EARLI SIG Writing Conference, Porto, Portugal.
35.
WengelinÅ. (2006). Examining pauses in writing: Theory, methods, and empirical data. In SullivanK. P. H.LindgrenE. (Eds.), Computer keystroke logging and writing, Volume 18: Methods and applications (pp. 107–130). Oxford, UK: Elsevier.
