The DOI matches its Crossref record; 14 of the 15 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Preference for Self-Correction in the Organization of Repair in Conversation
Abstract
An ‘organization of repair’ operates in conversation, addressed to recurrent problems in speaking, hearing, and understanding. Several features of that organization are introduced to explicate the mechanism which produces a strong empirical skewing in which self-repair predominates over other-repair, and to show the operation of a preference for self-repair in the organization of repair. Several consequences of the preference for self-repair for conversational interaction are sketched.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“What is clear is that other initiations of repair 'overwhelmingly yield self-corrections' (Schegloff et al, 1977: 376)”
From Dysarthria and other-initiated repair in everyday conversation (2020) · cites this paper as Schegloff et al, 1977: 376
Citations
Cites
A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation
Sacks, H., Schegloff, E. A., & Jefferson, G. (1974) · Language · doi:10.2307/412243 · Cited by 11,350
Self-citationSCHEGLOFF, E. A., & SACKS, H. (1973) · Semiotica · doi:10.1515/semi.1973.8.4.289 · Cited by 4,589
Self-citationSequencing in Conversational Openings 1
Schegloff, E. A. (1968) · American Anthropologist · doi:10.1525/aa.1968.70.6.02a00030 · Cited by 2,504
Self-citationThe Study Of Language In Its Social Context
Labov, W. (1971) · Mouton eBooks · doi:10.1515/9783111417509-004 · Cited by 879
Jefferson, G. (1973) · Semiotica · doi:10.1515/semi.1973.9.1.47 · Cited by 603
Self-citationOn some questions and ambiguities in conversation
Schegloff, E. A. (1985) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511665868.006 · Cited by 526
Self-citationSpeech Errors as Linguistic Evidence
(1984) · De Gruyter eBooks · doi:10.1515/9783110888423 · Cited by 510
Error correction as an interactional resource
Jefferson, G. (1974) · Language in Society · doi:10.1017/s0047404500004334 · Cited by 509
Self-citationForms of English : accent, morpheme, order
Bolinger, D. L., 安倍, 勇., & Kanekiyo, T. (1965) · Harvard University Press eBooks · Cited by 316
Second assessments : a study of some features of agreements/disagreements
Pomerantz, A. M. (1975) · Cited by 116
Research works printed but not linked: 8
- Laver, 1969, Work in Progress 3
- Parsons, 1937, The structure of social action
- Sacks, H. , and Schegloff, E. 1977. Two preferences in the organization of reference to persons in conversation and their interaction. To appear in Papers from the Boston University Conference on Ethnomethodology, ed. by Psathas, George .
- Bolinger, 1953, The life and death of words, American Scholar, 22
- Dubois, 1974, Berkeley studies in syntax and semantics, I, III.1
- Hockett, 1967, To honor Roman Jakobson
- Jefferson, 1972, Studies in social interaction, 294
- Garvey, 1975, Johns Hopkins University, Department of Psychology
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 1,001–1,017 of 1,017
Meyer, A. S. (2023) · Journal of Cognition · doi:10.5334/joc.268 · Cited by 34
Do, H. J., Kong, H.-K., Tetali, P., Lee, J., & Bailey, B. P. (2023) · Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1145/3579532 · Cited by 32
Defensive and Expansive Cycles of Learning: A Study of Home Care Encounters
Nummijoki, J., Engeström, Y., & Sannino, A. (2018) · Journal of the Learning Sciences · doi:10.1080/10508406.2017.1412970 · Cited by 31
Making Way and Making Sense: Including Newcomers in Interaction
Pillet-Shore, D. (2010) · Social Psychology Quarterly · doi:10.1177/0190272510369668 · Cited by 31
Identifying and Avoiding Confusion in Dialogue with People with Alzheimer's Disease
Chinaei, H., Currie, L. C., Danks, A., Lin, H., Mehta, T., & Rudzicz, F. (2017) · Computational Linguistics · doi:10.1162/coli_a_00290 · Cited by 30
Ma, X., & Huo, Y. (2024) · Information Processing & Management · doi:10.1016/j.ipm.2024.103755 · Cited by 30
The IBM natural conversation framework: a new paradigm for conversational UX design
Moore, R. J., An, S., & Ren, G.-J. (2023) · Human–Computer Interaction · doi:10.1080/07370024.2022.2081571 · Cited by 26
“Pepper, what do you mean?” Miscommunication and repair in robot-led survey interaction
Stommel, W., de Rijk, L., & Boumans, R. (2022) · 2022 31st IEEE International Conference on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (RO-MAN) · doi:10.1109/ro-man53752.2022.9900528 · Cited by 19
Følstad, A., Law, E. L.-C., & van As, N. (2024) · ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction · doi:10.1145/3690383 · Cited by 17
Gehle, R., Pitsch, K., Dankert, T., & Wrede, S. (2015) · 2015 24th IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (RO-MAN) · doi:10.1109/roman.2015.7333574 · Cited by 15
Une approche configurationnelle des leurres conversationnels
Relieu, M., Sahin, M., & Francillon, A. (2020) · Réseaux · doi:10.3917/res.220.0081 · Cited by 13
Dysarthria and other-initiated repair in everyday conversation
Bloch, S., & Barnes, S. (2020) · Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics · doi:10.1080/02699206.2019.1705915 · Cited by 13
Avgustis, I., Shirokov, A., & Iivari, N. (2021) · Lecture Notes in Computer Science · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-85610-6_10 · Cited by 11
Embodied-Visual Practices during Conversational Repair: Scoping Review
Saalasti, S., Pajo, K., Fox, B., Pekkala, S., & Laakso, M. (2023) · Research on Language and Social Interaction · doi:10.1080/08351813.2023.2272528 · Cited by 9
Displays and claims of understanding in conversation by people with aphasia
Walker, T., Thomson, J., & Watt, I. (2016) · Aphasiology · doi:10.1080/02687038.2015.1119797 · Cited by 7
Reineke, S., & Helmer, H. (2026) · Discourse & Communication · doi:10.1177/175048132411271494 · Cited by 3
“Repair is a conversation analytic term for practices aimed at resolving troubles during interaction, such as troubles of speaking (see Schegloff et al., 1977), hearing or understanding (parts of) utterances (see, e.g. p c Kendrick, 2015) and also disalignment with the content or action of…”
RetractedMeck, A.-M., Draxler, C., & Vogt, T. (2024) · International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction · doi:10.1080/10447318.2023.2266791 · Cited by 3
Metadata
- Authors
- Schegloff, E. A., Jefferson, G., & Sacks, H.
- Venue
- Language
- Publisher
- Cambridge University Press (CUP)
- Published
- 1977-06
- Volume
- 53
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 361-382
- ISSN
- 0097-8507 (ISSN-L)
- 1535-0665
- OpenAlex
- W1980298376
- Cited by
- 5,150
- References
- 15
- Citations by year
- 2026: 159 · 2025: 144 · 2024: 217 · 2023: 236 · 2022: 298 · 2021: 211 · 2020: 283 · 2019: 233 · 2018: 251 · 2017: 205 · 2016: 385 · 2015: 263 · 2014: 241 · 2013: 168 · 2012: 172
- FWCI
- 158.58
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Language (publishedVersion)
- Project Muse (Johns Hopkins University) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › Language, Discourse, Communication Strategies
- Social Sciences › Linguistics and Language › Linguistics and Discourse Analysis
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Speech and dialogue systems
- Keywords
- self-correction, conversational repair, conversation, intelligibility, turn-taking
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
