 | ||
|
Tolin and Fox Tree obtained recordings of 30
conversations between undergraduate students. Conversations were 12 minutes in
length and freely structured, but began with bad roommate experiences (because
we all know complaints generate the best stories). Several relevant
interactions were then extracted.
In their data, the authors distinguished
between generic backchannels and specific backchannels. While both signal
the attention of the listener, generic
backchannels typically display comprehension and reception. Words like mhm and uh huh are considered generic backchannels: after using these,
speakers often continued their story by providing new information. On the other
hand, specific backchannels convey
added information, showing the listeners' reaction to what was just said. Specific
backchannels include oh my god, wow, and yeah. When a listener responded with a specific backchannel, the
speaker was observed to then elaborate on whatever the listener was responding
to.
The researchers then conducted an experiment
using 20 short written dialogues from the data. These dialogues captured short
narratives, but with an interesting twist—the parts after the backchannel were
missing. Participants thus never knew what the storyteller said after the
backchannel. The backchannels were also altered to be either generic or
specific. Participants then guessed how the story would unfold by writing what
they thought the storyteller would have said next.
Despite being unaware of the full original
contexts of these recordings, the participants displayed some surprisingly
consistent patterns. When a generic backchannel was presented, the participants
were more likely to simply continue the story by presenting new information. To
do so, they also used words such as well
and so. However, when a specific
backchannel was presented, participants were more likely to elaborate on the
previous point in the story. They were also more likely to explicitly
acknowledge the backchannel itself by saying things like yeah.
These differences show that participants
actually perceive the backchannels to be important in determining their choice
of what comes next. The backchannels therefore have a role in shaping the story
telling. When you use a specific backchannel such as wow, you actually invite an elaboration, thereby steering the
story, allowing the storyteller to add emphasis and elaboration. Accordingly, the
type of backchannel gives a sense of predictability about what kind of
information would follow it. This might make it easier for people to follow a
particular conversation.
To conclude, backchannels are not simply
passive, but do actively influence the outcome of =storytelling. For example, the
researchers suggested that audiences who provide less specific backchannels
could result in a storyteller telling a... well... boring story. So perhaps if
you get bored by someone carrying on and on, you might like to try a specific
backchannel every once in a while!
------------------------
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2014.06.006
This summary was written by Darren Hum Chong Kai
