Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here to browse PSPB online!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Journal of Language and Social Psychology
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Ng, S. H.
Right arrow Articles by Dunne, M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Interruption and Influence in Discussion Groups

Sik Hung Ng

Victoria University of Wellington

Mark Brooke

University of Otago

Michael Dunne

Victoria University of Wellington

This study examines two aspects of conversational behavior that might lead to high perceived social influence in newly formed discussion groups, namely, to gain speaking turns by interrupting others and, conversely, to retain speakership against others' interruptions. Subjects discussed the issue of euthanasia and afterward ranked their own and each other's influence. Relative to low-ranking members, high-ranking members were more successful in interrupting others and in gaining speaking turns by other, noninterruptive means. When being interrupted, high-ranking members were better able to maintain the floor. However, the former also yielded to interruptions more frequently, probably because of the larger number of overall interruptions they received. Further analysis showed that certain speech acts (dissent, offer, reply) were more strongly associated than others (consent, reaction, request) with the successful enactment of interruptions and that, contrary to stereotypic beliefs, interruptions were not always disruptive but couldfunction constructively in rescuingandpromotinggroup discussion.

Journal of Language and Social Psychology, Vol. 14, No. 4, 369-381 (1995)
DOI: 10.1177/0261927X950144003


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Journal of Language and Social PsychologyHome page
S. H. Ng
From Language Acculturation to Communication Acculturation: Addressee Orientations and Communication Brokering in Conversations
Journal of Language and Social Psychology, March 1, 2007; 26(1): 75 - 90.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Journal of Language and Social PsychologyHome page
S. A. Reid, N. Keerie, and N. A. Palomares
Language, Gender Salience, and Social Influence
Journal of Language and Social Psychology, June 1, 2003; 22(2): 210 - 233.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Pers Soc Psychol BullHome page
M. S. Mast
Female Dominance Hierarchies: Are They Any Different from Males'?
Pers Soc Psychol Bull, January 1, 2002; 28(1): 29 - 39.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Journal of Language and Social PsychologyHome page
H. Z. Li
Cooperative and Intrusive Interruptions in Inter- and Intracultural Dyadic Discourse
Journal of Language and Social Psychology, September 1, 2001; 20(3): 259 - 284.
[Abstract] [PDF]