Speaking turns in face-to-face discussions.

Abstract

Patterns of speaking turns in 6-person mock juries were examined using Parker's (1988) floor model of conversational turns and a proposed simulation model, SPEAK, which embodies the notions of stable and transitory differences in members' tendencies to speak. Dyadic exchanges (floors) accounted for 49% of speaker turns in these juries, less than in Parker's (1988) 4-person conversational groups but substantially greater than expected by chance. SPEAK model reproduced sequential speaking patterns observed in both sets of data and accounted for the differential incidence of floor and nonfloor states observed in the different size groups. SPEAK simulations demonstrated that complex patterns of speaker turns can arise from confluence of stable differences in speaking rates (Stephan & Mishler, 1952), tendency for speakers to speak again on subsequent turns (Dabbs & Ruback, 1987), and group member competition for discussion time. Face-to-face group discussion often appears chaotic and unpredictable. To the casual observer, it may seem that the succession of speakers is without pattern and that the succession of topics is guided by superficial and often remote associations. However, more careful and systematic observation has revealed striking patterns in face-to-face conversation. Duncan (1972; Duncan & Fiske, 1977) has identified intricate patterns of verbal, vocal, and kinesic cues that are used to orchestrate speaker switches. Tracy (1985) summarized conversational conventions that maintain the coherence of discussion content, and she speculated that shifting the topic of conversation without regard for these conventions may invoke social disapproval. Building on the earlier work of Jaffe and Feldstein (1970), Dabbs and Ruback (1987) examined the patterns of single and simultaneous vocalizations and pauses during group discussion. This work and a more recent study by Parker (1988) highlight regularities in the sequence of conversational turns taken by members during group discussion. Although studying the patterns of conversational or speaker turns ignores many of the social and psychological overtones and the content of group discussion, who speaks when and how often constitute an important consideration in understanding the flow of information and influence during group discussion. Nonverbal behaviors may punctuate and color social interaction, but verbal communication is the primary means of expressing opinions, formulating arguments, and exchanging information during group discussion. Thus, the speaking turn is a basic unit of behavior in social and performance groups.