References and further reading for TALK for Psychologists

Albert, S. and de Ruiter, J.P. (2018). Repair: The interface between interaction and cognition. Topics in Cognitive Science, 10, 279-313. https://doi.org/10.1111/tops.12339

Antaki, C. (2008 ). Formulations in psychotherapy. In A. Peräkylä, C. Antaki, S. Vehviläinen, & I. Leudar (Eds.), Conversation analysis and psychotherapy(pp. 26– 42). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.  

Antaki, C., Barnes, R. & Leudar, I. (2007). Members’ and analysts’ interests: “Formulations” and “interpretations” in psychotherapy. In A. Hepburn & S. Wiggins (Eds.) Discursive Research in Practice: New Approaches to Psychology and Interaction (pp. 166–181). Cambridge, Cambridge University Press,

Antaki, C., Barnes, R., & Leudar, I. (2005). Diagnostic formulations in psychotherapy. Discourse Studies,7(6), 627– 647.  

Antaki, C. & Jahoda, A. (2010). Psychotherapists’ practices in keeping a session “on-track” in the face of clients’ “off-track” talk. Communication & Medicine, 7(1), 11–21

Bercelli, F., Rossano, F., & Viaro, M. (2008). Clients’ responses to therapists’ reinterpretations. In A. Peräkylä, C. Antaki, S. Vehviläinen, & I. Leudar (Eds.), Conversation analysis and psychotherapy(pp. 43– 61). Cambridge University Press.

Burford-Rice, R. & Augoustinos, M. (2018) “I didn’t mean that. It was just a slip of the tongue”: Racial slips and gaffes in the public arena. British Journal of Social Psychology, 57(1), 21-42.

Church, A., Paatsch, L. & Toe, D. (2017), Some trouble with repair: conversations between children with cochlear implants and hearing peers, Discourse Studies, 19(1), 49-68, doi: 10.1177/1461445616683592.

Davis,K. (1986). The process of problem (re)formulation in psychotherapy. Sociology of Health & Illness, 8 (1), 44– 74.

Drew, P. (2003). Comparative analysis of talk-in-interaction in different institutional settings: A sketch. In P. J. Glenn, C.D. LeBaron, & J. Mandelbaum (Eds.), Studies in language and social interaction: In honor of Robert Hopper (pp.293–308). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Ekberg, Katie, LeCouteur, Amanda, 2014. Co-implicating and re-shaping clients’ suggestions for behavioural change in Cognitive Behavioural Therapy practice. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 11 (1), 60-77.

Ekberg, K., & LeCouteur, A. (2015). Clients’resistance to therapists’ proposals: Managing epistemic and deontic status. Journal of Pragmatics, 90,12– 25.

Fitzgerald, P.E. & Ledar, I. (2010). On active listening in person-centred, solution-focused therapy. Journal of Pragmatics, 42(12), 3188-3198.

Forrester, M. (2017) Learning to use the word ‘know’. In A. Bateman & A. Church (Eds.) Children’s knowledge-in-interaction: Studies in conversation analysis. Singapore: Springer.

Hayano, K. (2012). Question design in conversation. In J.Sidnell & T. Stivers (Eds.) The handbook of conversation analysis (pp.395-414). Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.

Heritage, J. & Watson, D.R. (1979). Formulations as conversational objects. In G. Psathas (Ed.), Everyday language: Studies in ethnomethodology (pp. 123–162). New York: Irvington.

Holt, E. (2016). Laughter at last: Playfulness and laughter in interaction. Journal of Pragmatics, 100, 89-102.

Hutchby, I. (2005).‘Active listening’: Formulations and the elicitation of feelings-talk in child counselling. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 38(3), 303– 329.

Keel, S. (2015). Young children’s embodied pursuits of a response to their initial assessments, Journal of Pragmatics, 75(1), 1–24.

MacMartin, C. (2008 ). Resisting optimistic questions in narrative and solution-focused therapies. In A. Peräkylä, C. Antaki, S. Vehviläinen & I. Leudar (Eds.), Conversation analysis and psychotherapy (pp. 80– 99). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Madill, A. (2015 ). Conversation analysis and psychotherapy process research. In O. Gelo, A. Pritz, & B. Rieken (Eds.), Psychotherapy research (pp. 501– 515). Vienna, Austria: Springer.

Madill, A., Widdicombe, S., & Barkham, M. (2001). The potential of conversation analysis for psychotherapy research. Counseling Psychologist,29(3), 413– 443.

Muntigl, P. (2013). Resistance in couples counselling: Sequences of talk that disrupt progressivity and promote disaffiliation. Journal of Pragmatics,49(1), 18– 37.

Muntigl, P., & Horvath, A. O. (2014). The therapeutic relationship in action: How therapists and clients co-manage relational disaffiliation. Psychotherapy Research, 24(3), 327– 345.

Muntigl, P., Knight, N., Watkins, A., Horvath, A. O., & Angus, L. (2013 ). Active retreating: Person-centered practices to repair disaffiliation in therapy. Journal of Pragmatics, 53,1– 20.

Muntigl,P. & Zabala, L.H.  (2008)  Expandable resources: How clients get prompted to say more during psychotherapy,  Research on Language and Social Interaction, 41(2), 187–226.

Potter, J. and Hepburn, A. (2010). Putting aspiration into word: ‘laugh particles’, managing descriptive trouble and modulating action, Journal of Pragmatics, 42(6),1543–55.

Peräkylä, A.(2019). Conversation analysis and psychotherapy: Identifying transformative sequences, Research on Language and Social Interaction, 52(3), 257-280.

Peräkylä, A. (2013). Conversation analysis in psychotherapy. In T. Stivers & J. Sidnell (Eds.), Handbook in conversation analysis (pp. 551– 574). Oxford, England: Blackwell.

Peräkylä, A. (2011). After interpretation: Third-position utterances in psychoanalysis. Research on Language & Social Interaction,44(3), 288– 316.

Peräkylä, A. (2005). Patients’ responses to interpretations. A dialogue between conversation analysis and psycho-analytic theory. Communication & Medicine,2(2): 163– 176.

Peräkylä, A. (2004). Making links in psychoanalytic interpretations: A conversation analytic view. Psychotherapy Research,14(3), 289– 307.

Peräkylä, A., Antaki, C., Vehviläinen, S., & Leudar, I. (2008a ). Analysing psychotherapy in practice. In A. Peräkylä, C. Antaki, S. Vehviläinen & I Leudar (Eds.),Conversation analysis and psychotherapy(pp. 5– 25). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.

Peräkylä, A., Antaki, C., Vehviläinen, S. & Leudar, I. (Eds.). (2008b). Conversation analysis and psychotherapy . Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.

Rae, J. (2008 ). Lexical substitution as a therapeutic resource. In A. Peräkylä, C. Antaki, S. Vehviläinen, & I. Leudar (Eds.), Conversation analysis and psychotherapy (pp. 62– 79). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.

Stivers, T. & Rossano, F. (2010), Mobilizing response. Research on Language & Social Interaction, 43(1), 3–31.

Stokoe, E., Hepburn, A., & Antaki, C. (2012). Beware the “Loughborough School” of Social Psychology? Interaction and the politics of intervention. British Journal of Social Psychology, 51(3), 486–496.

Vehviläinen, S. (2003). Preparing and delivering interpretations in psychoanalytic interaction. Talk & Text, 23(4), 573–606.

Vehviläinen, S., Peräkylä, A., Antaki, C. & Leuder, I. (2008) A review of the conversational practices of psychotherapy. In A. Peräkylä, C. Antaki, S. Vehviläinen, & I. Leudar (Eds.), Conversation analysis and psychotherapy (pp. 26– 42). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.

Voutilainen, L., Peräkylä, A., & Ruusuvuori, J. (2010c). Misalignment as a therapeutic resource. Qualitative Research in Psychology,7(4), 299–315.

Voutilainen, L., Peräkylä, A., & Ruusuvuori, J. (2011). Therapeutic change in interaction: Conversation analysis of a transforming sequence. Psychotherapy Research, 21(3), 348–365.

Voutilainen, L., Rossano, F., & Peräkylä, A. (2018). Conversation analysis and psychotherapeutic change. In S.Pekarek-Doehler, J. Wagner & E. Gonzáles-Martínez (Eds.), Longitudinal studies on the organization of socialinteraction (pp. 225–254). London, England: Palgrave Macmillan.

Weiste, E., & Peräkylä, A. (2013). A comparative conversation analytic study of formulations in psychoanalysis and cognitive psychotherapy. Research on Language and Social Interaction,46(4), 299–321.

Weiste, E., Voutilainen, L., & Peräkylä, A. (2016). Epistemic asymmetries in psychotherapy interaction: Therapists’ practices for displaying access to clients’ inner experiences. Sociology of Health and Illness, 38(4), 645– 661.

Wynn,R. & Wynn,M. (2006). Empathy as an interactionally achieved phenomenon in psychotherapy: Characteristics of some conversational resources. Journal of Pragmatics, 38(9), 1385–1397.

Still to review:

  • Bänninger-Huber, E., & Widmer, C. (1999 ). Affective relationship patterns and psychotherapeutic change. Psychotherapy Research,9(1), 74– 87.

  • Bercelli, F., Rossano, F., & Viaro, M. (2013). Supra-session courses of action in psychotherapy. Journal of Pragmatics , 57, 118– 137.

  • Bergmann, J. R. (2016 ). Making mental disorders visible: proto-morality as diagnostic resource in psychiatric exploration. In M. O’Reilly & J. N. Lester (Eds.),The Palgrave handbook of adult mental health (pp. 247– 268). London, England: Palgrave Macmillan.

  • Bolden GB (2006) Little words that matter: Discourse markers ‘So’ and ‘Oh’ and the doing of other-attentiveness in social interaction. Journal of Communication 56: 661–688. 

  • Bolden & Angell. (2017 ). The organisation of the treatment recommendation phase in routine psychiatric visits. Research on Language and Social Interaction,50(2), 151– 170.

  • Buchholz, M. B., & Kächele, H. (2017 ). From turn-by-turn to larger chunks of talk: An exploratory study in psychotherapeutic micro-processes using conversation analysis. Research in Psychotherapy: Psychopathology, Process and Outcome, 20(3), 161– 178.

  • Enfield, N. J., & Levinson, S. C. (2006 ). Introduction: Human sociality as a new interdisciplinary field. In S.C. Levinson & N.J. Enfield (Eds.),Roots of human sociality. Culture, cognition and interaction(pp. 1– 38). Oxford, England: Berg.

  • Fitzgerald, P. (2013). Therapy talk: Conversation analysis in practice . London, England: Palgrave Macmillan.

  • Garfinkel, H., & Sacks, H. (1970). On formal structures of practical actions.Theoretical sociology : perspectives and developments (pp. 338– 386). New York, NY: Appleton-Century-Crofts.

  • Goffman, E. (1971). Relations in public: Microstudies of the public order . New York, NY: Harper and Row.

  • Goffman, E. (1983). The interaction order: American sociological association, 1982 presidential address. American Sociological Review,48(1), 1– 17.

  • Goodwin, C. (1984) Notes on story structure and the organisation of participation. In M. Atkinson & J. Heritage (Eds.) (1984) Structures of social action: Studies in conversation analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  • He, Agnes, 1993. Exploring modality in institutional interactions: cases from academic counselling encounters. Text 13 (2), 503--528.

  • Heritage, J. (2011). Territories of knowledge, territories of experience: Empathic moments in interaction. The Morality of Knowledge in Conversation, 29, 159– 183.

  • Heritage, J. (2012). Epistemics in conversation. In J.Sidnell & T. Stivers (Eds.) The handbook of conversation analysis (pp.370-394). Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.

  • Heritage, J., & Atkison, M. (1984). Introduction. In J. M. Atkinson, J. Heritage, & K. Oatley (Eds.), Structures of social action(pp. 1– 15). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.

  • Heritage, John, Raymond, Geoffrey, 2005. The terms of agreement: indexing epistemic authority and subordination in talk-in-interaction. Social Psychology Quarterly 68, 15--38. 

  • Jefferson, G. (1990). List construction as a task and resource. In G. Psathas (Ed.),Interaction competence(pp. 63– 92). Washington, DC: University Press of America. 278 

  • Labov, W., & Fanshel, D. (1977).Therapeutic discourse: Psychotherapy as conversation . New York, NY: Academic Press.

  • Lavelle, M., Healey, P. G., & McCabe, R. (2014). Participation during first social encounters in schizophrenia. PloS One,9 (1), e77506.

  • Lepper, G. (2009). The pragmatics of therapeutic interaction: An empirical study. The International Journal of Psychoanalysis,90(5), 1075– 1094.

  • Levinson, S. C. (2006). On the human“interaction engine”. In S. C. Levinson & N. J. Enfield (Eds.), Roots of human sociality. Culture, cognition and interaction(pp. 39– 69). Oxford, England: Berg.

  • McCabe, R., Skelton, J., Heath, C., Burns, T., & Priebe, S. (2002 ). Engagement of patients with psychosis in the consultation: Conversation analytic study.British Medical Journal,325(7373), 1148– 1151.

  • McCabe, R., Sterno, I., Priebe, S., Barnes, R., & Byng, R. (2017 ). How do healthcare professionals interview patients to assess suicide risk?BMC Psychiatry,17 (1), 122.

  • Mikesell, L., & Bromley, E. (2016). Exploring the heterogeneity of‘schizophrenic speech’.In M.O’ Reilly & J. N. Lester (Eds.),The palgrave handbook of adult mental health(pp. 329– 351). London, England: Palgrave Macmillan.

  • Mondada, L. (2011) The management of knowledge discrepancies and of epistemic changes in institutional interactions. In T. Stivers, L. Mondada & J. Steensig (Eds.) The morality of knowledge in conversation (pp. 27-57). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  • Pekarek Doehler, S., Wagner, J., & Gonzáles-Martínez, E. (eds.). (2018). Longitudinal studies on the organization of social interaction . London, England: Palgrave-Macmillan.

  • Peräkylä, A., & Sorjonen, M. L. (Eds.). (2012). Emotion in interaction . Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.

  • Quirk, A., Chaplin, R., Lelliott, P., & Seale, C. (2012 ). How pressure is applied in shared decisions about antipsychotic medication: A conversation analytic study of psychiatric outpatient consultations. Sociology of Health & Illness, 34 (1), 95– 113.

  • Ramseyer, F., & Tschacher, W. (2011 ). Nonverbal synchrony in psychotherapy: Coordinated body movement reflects relationship quality and outcome. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology,79 (3), 284.

  • Raymond G (2004) Prompting action: The stand-alone ‘so’ in sequences of talk-in-interaction. Research on Language and Social Interaction 37(2): 185–218. 

  • Robinson, J. (2016) Accountability in social interaction (pp. 1-44). In J. Robinson (Ed.) Accountability in social interaction. New York: Oxford University Press.

  • Savander, E. È., Weiste, E., Hintikka, J., Leiman, M., Valkeapää, T., Heinonen, E. O., & Peräkylä, A. (2019). Offering patients opportunities to reveal their subjective experiences in psychiatric assessment interviews. Patient Education and Counseling. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2019.02.021

  • Schegloff EA (1992) Repair after next turn: The last structurally provided defense of intersubjectivity in conversation. American Journal of Sociology 97(5): 1295–1345 

  • Schegloff EA (1996) Confirming allusions: Toward an empirical account of action. American Journal of Sociology 102(1): 161–216.

  • Schegloff EA (1997) Practices and actions: Boundary cases of other-initiated repair. Discourse Processes 23(3): 499–545.  

  • Schegloff, E. A. (2007). Sequence organization in interaction. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

  • Schegloff, E. A., Jefferson, G., & Sacks, H. (1977). The preference for self-correction in the organization of repair in conversation. Language, 53(2), 361–382.

  • Smoliak, O., Le Couteur, A. & Quinn‐Nilas, C. (2018), Issuing and responding to unusual questions: A conversation analytic account of Tom Andersen's therapeutic practice. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy 

  • Stevanovic, M., Himberg, T., Niinisalo, M., Kahri, M., Peräkylä, A., Sams, M., & Hari, R. (2017). Sequentiality, mutualvisibility, and behavioral matching: Body sway and pitch register during joint decision making. Research on Language and Social Interaction,50(1), 33–53.

  • Stevanovic, M., & Peräkylä, A. (2014). Three orders in the organization of human action: On the interface between knowledge, power, and emotion in interaction and social relations. Language in Society, 43(2), 185–207.

  • Stiles, W. B., Elliott, R., Llewelyn, S. P., Firth-Cozens, J. A., Margison, F. R., Shapiro, D. A., & Hardy, G. (1990).Assimilation of problematic experiences by clients in psychotherapy. Psychotherapy,27, 411–420.

  • Stivers, Tanya, 2008. Stance, alignment and affiliation during storytelling: when nodding is a token of affiliation. Research on Language and Social Interaction 41 (1), 31--57.

  • Stivers, Tanya, 2011. Morality and question design: ‘‘of course’’ as contesting a presupposition of askability. In: Stivers, T., Mondada, L., Steensig, J. (Eds.), The Morality of Knowledge in Conversation. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 82--106. 

  • Sutherland, O., Peräkylä, A., & Elliott, R. (2014). Conversation analysis of the two-chair self-soothing task in emotion-focused therapy. Psychotherapy Research, 24(6), 738–751.

  • Thompson, L., & McCabe, R. (2018). How psychiatrists recommend treatment and its relationship with patient uptake. Health Communication,33(11), 1345–1354.