CoChat
Sign Up
PreprintCited by 7Language, Discourse, Communication StrategiesCybernetics and Technology in SocietyEthics and Social Impacts of AI

The DOI matches its DataCite record.

Navigating Incommensurability Between Ethnomethodology, Conversation Analysis, and Artificial Intelligence

Open access
Reeves, Stuart·2022·arXiv
DOI 10.48550/arxiv.2206.11899arXiv 2206.11899
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Like many research communities, ethnomethodologists and conversation analysts have begun to get caught up -- yet again -- in the pervasive spectacle of surging interests in Artificial Intelligence (AI). Inspired by discussions amongst a growing network of researchers in ethnomethodology (EM) and conversation analysis (CA) traditions who nurse such interests, I started thinking about what things EM and the more EM end of conversation analysis might be doing about, for, or even with, fields of AI research. So, this piece is about the disciplinary and conceptual questions that might be encountered, and -- in my view -- may need addressing for engagements with AI research and its affiliates. Although I'm mostly concerned with things to be aware of as well as outright dangers, later on we can think about some opportunities. And throughout I will keep using 'we' to talk about EM&CA researchers; but this really is for convenience only -- I don't wish to ventriloquise for our complex research communities. All of the following should be read as emanating from my particular research history, standpoint etc., and treated (hopefully) as an invitation for further discussion amongst EM and CA researchers turning to technology and AI specifically.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

DataCite · 10.48550/arxiv.2206.11899

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 25

  1. Anderson, R.J., and Sharrock, W.W. 2017. Has ethnomethodology run its course? Unpublished manuscript. https://www.sharrockandanderson.co.uk/wpcontent/uploads/2019/10/Run-its-Course-VII.pdf Blackwell, A.F., Blythe, M., and Kaye, J. 2017. Undisciplined disciples: everything you always wanted to know about ethnomethodology but were afraid to ask Yoda. Personal Ubiquitous Comput . 21, 3 (June 2017), 571-592. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00779-017-0999-z Button, G., Lee, J.R., Coulter, J., and Sharrock, W. 1995. Computers, Minds and Conduct . Blackwell Publishers, Inc., USA. · DOI
  2. Crabtree, A., Rodden, T., Tolmie, P., and Button, G. 2009. Ethnography considered harmful. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '09). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 879888. https://doi.org/10.1145/1518701.1518835 · DOI
  3. Dourish, P. 2006. Implications for design. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '06). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 541-550. https://doi.org/10.1145/1124772.1124855 · DOI · Paper page
  4. Dourish P. 2014. Reading and Interpreting Ethnography. In: Olson J., Kellogg W. (eds) Ways of Knowing in HCI . Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/9781-4939-0378-8\_1 · DOI
  5. Dreyfus, H. 1992. What Computers Still Can't Do: A Critique of Artificial Reason (Revised ed.). MIT Press.
  6. Forsythe, D.E. 2002. Studying Those Who Study Us: An Anthropologist in the World of Artificial Intelligence (Hess, D.J., ed). Stanford University Press, USA.
  7. Grudin, J. 2017. From Tool to Partner: The Evolution of Human-Computer Interaction . Synthesis Lectures on Human-Centered Informatics 2017, 10:1, i-183. https://doi.org/10.2200/S00745ED1V01Y201612HCI035 · DOI
  8. Hughes, J.A., Randall, D., and Shapiro, D. 1992. Faltering from ethnography to design. In Proceedings of the 1992 ACM conference on Computer-supported cooperative work (CSCW '92). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 115-122. https://doi.org/10.1145/143457.143469 · DOI
  9. Luff, P., Gilbert, N., and Frohlich, D. 1990. Computers and Conversation (Computers and People Series). Elsevier, Jul 1990. https://doi.org/10.1016/C2009-0-21641-2 · DOI
  10. Mair, M., Brooker, P., Dutton, W., & Sormani, P. 2021. Just what are we doing when we're describing AI? Harvey Sacks, the commentator machine, and the descriptive politics of the new artificial intelligence. Qualitative Research , 21 (3), 341359. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794120975988 · DOI · Paper page
  11. Mitchell, M. 2019. Artificial Intelligence: A Guide for Thinking Humans . Penguin, UK.
  12. Moore, R.J., and Arar, R. 2019. Conversational UX Design: A Practitioner's Guide to the Natural Conversation Framework . Association for Computing Machinery, New York. DOI: 10.1145/3304087. · DOI · Paper page
  13. Pelikan, H.R.M, Broth, M., and Keevallik, L. 2020. 'Are You Sad, Cozmo?': How Humans Make Sense of a Home Robot's Emotion Displays. Proceedings of the 2020 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction . Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 461-470. https://doi.org/10.1145/3319502.3374814 · DOI · Paper page
  14. Pitsch, K., Dankert, T., Gehle, R., and Wrede, S. 2016. Referential practices. Effects of a museum guide robot suggesting a deictic 'repair' action to visitors attempting to orient to an exhibit. 25th IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (RO-MAN) , 2016, pp. 225-231. https://doi.org/10.1109/ROMAN.2016.7745135 · DOI
  15. Porcheron, M., Fischer, J., and Reeves, S. 2021. Pulling Back the Curtain on the Wizards of Oz. Proc. ACM Hum.-Comput . Interact. 4, CSCW3, Article 243 (December 2020), 22 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3432942 · DOI
  16. Reeves, S., and Porcheron, M. Conversational AI: Respecifying participation as regulation. In William Housley, Adam Edwards, Roser Beneito-Montagut, and Richard Fitzgerald, editors, The SAGE Handbook of Digital Society . SAGE, December 2022.
  17. Rooksby, J. 2013. Wild in the Laboratory: A Discussion of Plans and Situated Actions. ACM Trans. Comput.-Hum. Interact. 20, 3, Article 19 (July 2013), 17 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/2491500.2491507 · DOI
  18. Shanker, S.G. 1998. Wittgenstein's Remarks on the Foundations of AI . Routledge.
  19. Simon, H.A. 1996. Sciences of the Artificial (3rd ed.). MIT Press, Sept. 1996.
  20. Smith, G. 2018. The AI Delusion . Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198824305.001.0001 · DOI
  21. Suchman, L.A. 1987. Plans and situated actions: the problem of human-machine communication . Cambridge University Press, USA.
  22. Suchman, L.A. 1993. Response to Vera and Simon's Situated Action: A Symbolic Interpretation. Cognitive Science , 17: 7175. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog1701\_5 · DOI
  23. Suchman, L.A. 2006. Human-Machine Reconfigurations: Plans and Situated Actions . Cambridge University Press, USA.
  24. Wieder, D.L. 1993. On the Compound Questions Raised by Attempts to Quantify Conversation Analysis' Phenomena Part 2: The issue of Incommensurability. Research on Language and Social Interaction , 26:2, 213226, https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327973rlsi2602\_7 · DOI
  25. Vera, A.H., and Simon, H.A. 1993. Situated Action: A Symbolic Interpretation. Cognitive Science , 17: 7-48. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog1701\_2 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 7

Metadata

Authors
Reeves, S.
Corresponding author
Reeves, Stuart
ORCID
Reeves, Stuart
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2022
DOI
10.48550/arxiv.2206.11899
arXiv
2206.11899
OpenAlex
W7086614362
Cited by
7
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 2
FWCI
4.71
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Repository@Nottingham (University of Nottingham) (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › Language, Discourse, Communication Strategies
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History and Philosophy of Science › Cybernetics and Technology in Society
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
Keywords
ethnomethodology, conversation analysis, artificial intelligence, incommensurability, academic community

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