9 Cooperation in com Flashcards
relationship between communication and cooperation
- How human communication requires cooperation
- How people request and give assistance
A normative preference for cooperative responses
- How people request and give assistance
pointing gestures
- Recipients understand what a gesture does by using the three principles seen in Week 1
- Use of the three principles requires cooperative thinking
- Let’s consider three important communicative actions (Tomasello, 2008): requesting, informing, sharing
requesting
producers assume recipients are motivated to cooperate
offering information
p assumtion that r want to be helpful
sharing
p assume that r will be interested in hearing the story
cooperative thinking and communication
- Fundamental communicative actions (requesting, informing, sharing) rely upon cooperative assumptions and motivations
- With the ‘cooperative turn’ (week 2), our species started to rely on cooperation for its adaptation and survival
- Communication emerged on the back of already existing cooperative thinking○ Human communication requires cooperative thinking and normative expectations that communicators will be cooperative (Grice, 1975)
how people ask for help? (Curl, 2006; Kendrick & Drew, 2016)
in many cases people only describe their problem, and others spontaneously offer assistance (Curl, 2006; Kendrick & Drew, 2016)
- Recipients listen out for the implications of what others say; for example, in terms of their needs and wants (Tomasello, 2008) - This shows that communication is driven by cooperative thinking and cooperative motivations ○ Note: what risks are associated with ‘describing a problem’ as a way of seeking assistance? Also remember our discussion about neurodivergence in week 2.
cooperation does not always require talk? (Kendrick & Drew 2016)
research suggests people can obtain assistance when they visibly look for an object in a room.
or by body language; e.g. showing a picture in a book, someone tilts their head suggesting trouble seeing, so person turns the book so he can see
Alternative responses to initiating actions
humans have a preference for cooperative responses, often involve question and answer however…
alternative responses to initiating actions are often possible (e.g. accepting or declining an invitiation)
different ways to produce these types of responses
preferred responses
A makes proposal
B accepts (quickly and with a turn without elaboration)
cooperative
dispreferred responses
A makes a proposal
B may not reject explicitly; silence followed by “well” “i dont know” and then mentions other arrangement, implying an inability to accept A’s proposal
speakers can modify their initiating action, anticipating a dispreferred response
e.g. when hear a silence and then “well”, person A can modify their question, one which would then allow person B to respond with a preferred response
e.g. “do you want to go..” “um well..” “or are you busy” “yeah i have plans”
note on delayed responses
gaps longer than 0.2 seconds can be meaningful to pps (departing from the minimisation of gaps rule)
gaps are also meaningful as they indicate a problem
They are treated this way because of the notion of PREFERENCE in the organisation of communicative action
preference
refers to social norms that favour some responses over others (not referring to personal favours).
responses that support an initiating action are preferred (they’re delivered straight-forwardly and quickly)
Not supporting an initiating action is dispreferred; evidenced by delayed and accompanied by explanations. quite often not an explicit rejection = needs to be inferred by the producer
evidence for the preference for cooperation (Kendrick & Torreira, 2015; Stivers, 2010)
found dispreffered responses often start with delays “um” “well”
Stivers - 72% of questions received a ‘yes’ response (people could dislike saying no, but also could be that questioners actively avoid questions that are likely to have a no response)