Framing interactivity in complex communication of debate talk show

References

1. Aakhus, Mark
   2003 “Neither Naïve nor Normative Reconstruction: Dispute Mediators, Impasse, and the Design of Argumentation.” Argumentation: An International Journal on Reasoning: –. 10.1023/A:1025112227381
   https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1025112227381 [Google Scholar]
2. Aakhus, Mark
   2007 “Communication as Design.” Communication Monographs: –. 10.1080/03637750701196383
   https://doi.org/10.1080/03637750701196383 [Google Scholar]
3. Barbour, Joshua B. and Rebecca Gill
   2014 “Designing Communication for the Day-to-Day Safety Oversight of Nuclear Power Plants”. Journal of Applied Communication Research: –. 10.1080/00909882.2013.859291
   https://doi.org/10.1080/00909882.2013.859291 [Google Scholar]
4. Black, Laura W.
   2008 “Deliberation, Storytelling, and Dialogic Moments.” Communication Theory (): –. 10.1111/j.1468‑2885.2007.00315.x
   https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2885.2007.00315.x [Google Scholar]
5. Bruxelles, Sylvie and Catherine Kerbrat-Orecchioni
   2004 “Coalitions in Polylogues.” Journal of Pragmatics: –. 10.1016/S0378‑2166(03)00037‑7
   https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(03)00037-7 [Google Scholar]
6. Buttny, Richard
   2010 “Citizen Participation, Metadiscourse, and Accountability: A Public Hearing on a Zoning Change for Wal-Mart.” Journal of Communication (): –. 10.1111/j.1460‑2466.2010.01507.x
   https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2010.01507.x [Google Scholar]
7. Burgsteden van, Lotte, Hedwig te Modler, and Geoffrey Raymond
   2022 “The Turn-by-Turn Unfolding of “Dialogue”: Examining Participants’ Orientation to Moments of Transformative Engagement.” Language and Communication: –. 10.1016/j.langcom.2021.11.002
   https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langcom.2021.11.002 [Google Scholar]
8. Dascal, Marcelo
   1998 “The Study of Controversies and the Theory of History and Science.” Science in Context: –. 10.1017/S0269889700002957
   https://doi.org/10.1017/S0269889700002957 [Google Scholar]
9. Drew, Paul
   1992 “Contested Evidence in Courtroom Cross-Examination: The Case of a Trial for Rape.” InTalk at Work: Interaction in Institutional Settings, ed. byPaul Drew and John Heritage, –. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   [Google Scholar]
10. Eemeren, Frans H. van
    2010 Strategic Maneuvering in Argumentative Discourse: Extending the Pragma-dialectical Theory of Argumentation. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/aic.2
    https://doi.org/10.1075/aic.2 [Google Scholar]
11. Eemeren, Frans H. van and Peter Houtlosser
    2005 “Theoretical Construction and Argumentation Reality: An Analytic Model of Critical Discussion and Conventionalized Types of Argumentation Activity.” InThe Uses of Argument: Proceedings of a Conference at McMaster University, ed. byDavid Hitchcock, –. Hamilton: McMaster University.
    [Google Scholar]
12. Ellis, Donald G.
    2020 “Talking to the Enemy: Difficult Conversations and Ethnopolitical Conflict.” Negotiation and Conflict Management Research: –. 10.1111/ncmr.12187
    https://doi.org/10.1111/ncmr.12187 [Google Scholar]
13. Garcia, Angela Cora
    2019 How Mediation Works: Resolving Conflict Through Talk. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781139162548
    https://doi.org/10.1017/9781139162548 [Google Scholar]
14. Goffman, Erving
    1974 Frame Analysis: An Essay on the Organization of Experience. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
15. Goffman, Erving
    1981 Forms of Talk. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
    [Google Scholar]
16. Greatbatch, David
    1992 “On the Management of Disagreement between News Interviewees.” InTalk at Work, ed. byPaul Drew and John Heritage, –. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
17. Greatbatch, David and Robert Dingwall
    1997 “Argumentative Talk in Divorce Mediation Sessions”. American Sociological Review: –. 10.2307/2657457
    https://doi.org/10.2307/2657457 [Google Scholar]
18. Greco Morasso, Sara G.
    2011 Argumentation in Dispute Mediation. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/aic.3
    https://doi.org/10.1075/aic.3 [Google Scholar]
19. Hutchby, Ian
    1996 Confrontation Talk: Arguments, Asymmetries, and Power on Talk Radio. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
    [Google Scholar]
20. Jackson, Sally
    1992 “Virtual Standpoints” and the Pragmatics of Conversational Argument. InArgumentation Illuminated, ed. byFrans H. van Eemeren, Rob Grootendorst, J. Anthony Blair, and Charles A. Willard, –. Amsterdam: SicSat.
    [Google Scholar]
21. Jacobs, Scott and Mark Aakhus
    2002 “What Mediators Do with Words: Implementing Three Models of Rational Discussion in Dispute Mediation.” Conflict Resolution Quarterly: –. 10.1002/crq.3890200205
    https://doi.org/10.1002/crq.3890200205 [Google Scholar]
22. Jacobs, Scott and Sally Jackson
    1981 “Argument as a Natural Category: The Routine Grounds for Arguing in Conversation.” The Western Journal of Speech Communication: –. 10.1080/10570318109374035
    https://doi.org/10.1080/10570318109374035 [Google Scholar]
23. Jacobs, Scott and Sally Jackson
    1989 “Building a Model of Conversational Argument.” InRethinking Communication, Vol 2: Paradigm Exemplars, ed. byBrenda Dervin, Lawrence Grossberg, Barbara J. O’Keefe, and Ellen Wartella, –. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
    [Google Scholar]
24. Jacobs, Scott and Sally Jackson
    2006 “Derailments of Argumentation: It Takes Two to Tango.” InConsidering Pragma-dialectics, ed. byPeter Houtlosser and Agnès van Rees, –. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
    [Google Scholar]
25. Lakoff, George, and Mark Johnson
    2006 “Metaphors We Live by.” InThe Production of Reality: Essays and Readings on Social Interaction, ed. byJodi O’Brien, –. Thousand Oaks, CA: Pine Forge.
    [Google Scholar]
26. Lewiński, Marcin and Mark Aakhus
    2014 “Argumentative Polylogues in a Dialectical Framework: A Methodological Inquiry.” Argumentation: –. 10.1007/s10503‑013‑9307‑x
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s10503-013-9307-x [Google Scholar]
27. Lewiński, Marcin and Mark Aakhus
    2023 Argumentation in Complex Communication: Managing Disagreement in a Polylogue. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
28. Montiegel, Kristella and Jeffrey D. Robinson
    2019 “First Matters: A Qualitative Examination of a Strategy for Controlling the Agenda When Answering Questions in the 2016 U.S. Republican Primary Election Debates.” Communication Monographs: –. 10.1080/03637751.2018.1498978
    https://doi.org/10.1080/03637751.2018.1498978 [Google Scholar]
29. Pan, Yun
    2022 “Framing in Interactive Academic Talk: A Conversation-Analytic Perspective.” Pragmatics: –. 10.1075/prag.20028.pan
    https://doi.org/10.1075/prag.20028.pan [Google Scholar]
30. Sprain, Leah, Martin Carcasson, and Andy Merolla
    2014 “Utilizing “on Tap” Experts in Deliberative Forums: Implications for Design.” Journal of Applied Communication Research: –. 10.1080/00909882.2013.859292
    https://doi.org/10.1080/00909882.2013.859292 [Google Scholar]
31. Tannen, Deborah
    (ed.) 1993 Framing in Discourse. NewYork, NY: Oxford Press.
    [Google Scholar]
32. Thompson, W. Travis, Frederick Steier, and Wit Ostrenko
    2014 “Designing Communication Process for the Design of an Idea Zone at a Science Center.” Journal of Applied Communication Research: –. 10.1080/00909882.2013.874570
    https://doi.org/10.1080/00909882.2013.874570 [Google Scholar]
33. Tracy, Karen
    2001 “Discourse Analysis in Communication”. InThe Handbook of Discourse Analysis, ed. byDeborah Schiffrin, Deborah Tannen, and Heidi E. Hamilton, –. Malden: Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
34. Tracy, Karen
    2010 Challenges of Ordinary Democracy: A Case Study in Deliberation and Dissent. University Park, PA: The Pennsylvania State University.
    [Google Scholar]
35. Van der Houwen, Fleur
    2009 “Formulating Disputes.” Journal of Pragmatics: –. 10.1016/j.pragma.2009.02.009
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2009.02.009 [Google Scholar]
36. Vasilyeva, Alena L.
    2015 “Identity as a Resource to Shape Mediation in Dialogic Interaction.” Language and Dialogue: –. 10.1075/ld.5.3.01vas
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ld.5.3.01vas [Google Scholar]
37. Vasilyeva, Alena L.
    2016 “Confrontation and Collaboration in the Course of the Election Debate.” Language and Dialogue: –. 10.1075/ld.6.3.02vas
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ld.6.3.02vas [Google Scholar]
38. Vasilyeva, Alena L.
    2017 “Practices of Topic and Dialogue Activity Management in Dispute Mediation.” Discourse Studies: –. 10.1177/1461445617701993
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445617701993 [Google Scholar]
39. Vasilyeva, Alena L.
    2023 “Debaters’ Actions to Manage Interaction in the Context of the Debate Talk Show.” Language and Dialogue: –. 10.1075/ld.00148.vas
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ld.00148.vas [Google Scholar]
40. Verschueren, Jef
    1999 Understanding Pragmatics. New York: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
41. Weger, Harry and Mark Aakhus
    2003 “Arguing in Internet Chat Rooms: Argumentative Adaptations to Chat Room Design and Some Consequences for Public Deliberation at a Distance.” Argumentation and Advocacy: –. 10.1080/00028533.2003.11821595
    https://doi.org/10.1080/00028533.2003.11821595 [Google Scholar]
42. Weigand, Edda
    2006 “Argumentation: The Mixed Game.” Argumentation: –. 10.1007/s10503‑006‑9000‑4
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s10503-006-9000-4 [Google Scholar]
43. Апресян, Юрий Дереникович [Apresian Yurij Derenikobich] 1995 Избранные Труды. Том 2. Интегральное Описание Языка и Системная Лексикография [Selected Works. Volume 2. Integral Description of Language and System Lexicography]. M.: Школа “Языки Русской Культуры” [M.: School “Languages of the Russian Cultury”].
    [Google Scholar]