Women and men in conversation: a consideration of therapists' interruptions in therapeutic discourse

Studies of day-to-day conversation have shown that interrupting can be used as a gendered means of determining both conversational topic and speaker. This paper explores the nature of interruptions in therapeutic conversations in this light. Drawing upon two recent studies of therapists' interruptions, the author offers some preliminary ideas for consideration by therapists, clinical supervisors and researchers.     

Healing elements of therapeutic conversation: dialogue as an embodiment of love

From our Bakhtinian perspective, understanding requires an active process of talking and listening. Dialogue is a precondition for positive change in any form of therapy. Using the perspectives of dialogism and neurobiological development, we analyze the basic elements of dialogue, seeking to understand why dialogue becomes a healing experience in a network meeting. From the perspective of therapist as dialogical partner, we examine actions that support dialogue in conversation, shared emotional experience, creation of community, and creation of new shared language. We describe how feelings of love, manifesting powerful mutual emotional attunement in the conversation, signal moments of therapeutic change.     

Rules and topics in conversation

Rules of conversation are given that specify what can follow what. A system for deciding what makes a reasonable subject for a conversation is shown. Topics are discussed and rules for topic shift are presented.     

Allocation of speech in conversation

In a replication and extension of Conger and Killeen's (1974) widely cited demonstration of matching in conversations, we evaluated nine participants’ allocation of speech and gaze to two conversational partners. German speakers participated in two 90‐min sessions in which confederates uttered approval on independent variable‐interval schedules. In one of the sessions, confederates uttered approval contingent upon and contiguous with eye contact whereas in the other session approval was uttered independent of the participant's gaze. Several measures of participants’ verbal behavior were taken, including relative duration and rate of speech and gaze. These were compared to confederates’ relative rate of approval and relative duration and rate of talk. The generalized matching equation was fitted to the various relations between participants’ behavior and confederates’ behavior. Conger and Killeen's results were not replicated; participants’ response allocation did not show a systematic relation to the confederates’ relative rate of approval. The strongest relations were to overall talk, rather than approval. In both conditions, the participant talked more to the confederate who talked less—inverse or antimatching. Participants’ gaze showed the same inverse relation to the confederates’ talk. Requiring gaze to be directed toward a confederate for delivery of approval made no difference in the results. The absence of a difference combined with prior research suggests that matching or antimatching in conversations is more likely due to induction than to reinforcement.     

Recognition memory for utterances in conversation

This study reports an experiment on incidental recognition memory for conversation. A number of people listened to a dyadic conversation and were tested immediately afterwards or four days later. The two people in the tape-recorded conversation did not know each other, nor did the audience know the two speaker-listeners on the tape. This design was used to further clarify the role of familiarity and personal participation for memory of conversational discourse. Gist memory was high in both conditions, with lower performance after four days. Surface memory could be verified, and the level of the variables used to index surface memory was about the same in both the immediate and delayed condition. With this study we have taken a step towards better understanding of the role of familiarity and participation in communicative events for memory of these events. Even in this "minimum" participation and familiarity study, we found some indications of verbatim memory.     

Morphological errors in casual conversation.

Occasionally, listeners' strategies for dealing with casual speech lead them into an erroneous perception of the intended message-a slip of the ear. When such errors occur, listeners report hearing, as clearly and distinctly as any correctly perceived stretch of speech, something that does not correspond to the speakers' utterance. From a collection of almost 1000 examples of misperceptions in English conversation, perceptual errors involving morphology suggest that listeners expect monomorphemic forms and treat phonological information as primary. Listeners are not particularly attentive to morphological information and may supply inflectional morphemes as needed by context.     

Computer-assisted analysis of conversation

Psychologists and linguists have employed computer programs to analyze written and spoken text. The Computer-Assisted Language Analysis System (CALAS) is a computer program that utilizes three sequential programs to parse the language of two speakers in a conversation into words, phrases, and clauses, and places verbs and nouns into categories derived from theories of case grammar. Rather than using a large “dictionary,” CALAS determines the category of each word on the basis of adjacent function words and placement of the words in the sentence. Output from CALAS lists the frequency of each category and can be used to construct measures of linguistic style and verb usage. Research employing CALAS includes the study of various types of psychotherapy, behavior therapy, classroom discourse, and literary texts.     

Logical relations and comprehension in conversation

This study examines how logical relations (e.g., causality and identity) in spoken discourse affect comprehension. Research on cohesion, which shows that specific unit template structures link discourse and text together, is used to build a model of language comprehension that places template structures at the base of a context comparison operation. Subjects were engaged in ordinary conversation with a confederate trained to produce specific types of logical utterances unobtrusively. The comprehension model predicted that systematically different latencies, topical response, and remedial response of subjects would follow the test items produced by the confederate. The data support the predictions. It is shown that comprehension occurs via one processing path if there is a direct tie between the target item and the immediately prior item in discourse, and a separate processing path if the tie is between the target item and the earlier context. Subject response in conversation is shown to display useful evidence on the nature of comprehension achieved. The findings specify and extend the recent research on the integration of new information into a textual structure.     

Judgments of communicative intent in conversation

In conversation people make specific statements that are intended to accomplish some particular social action (e.g., to praise, criticize or sympathize). To communicate effectively, people must consensually perceive the intentions of each other’s messages. In this research we examined the degree of consensus in judgments of communicative intent. Participants engaged in separate, brief conversations with three friends, watched videotapes of their interactions, and judged the communicative intent of 6 randomly selected statements. Observers also judged these statements under one of three conditions: audio-visual, audio, or text. Analyses showed that participants agreed strongly in their judgments of intent and that observers also agreed in their judgments, but not as much as participants.