About this Research Topic
Recent developments in understanding how social interaction is organized emphasize non-human animals as full-fledged participants that actively engage in the unfolding of interaction, and also when the other participant is human. In earlier ethnomethodologically oriented conversation analysis, non-human animals were mostly treated as speakers’ resources in human-to-human conversations, until it was shown that non-human animals actually organize social interaction together with humans, through non-verbal means. This opens up a new perspective that enables researchers to focus on the ways in which the participants orient to each other and the ongoing interspecies interaction, as the different semiotic systems intertwine. At the same time, this approach often remains agnostic regarding the actual properties of the animal mind. The studies on social interaction elaborate on the sequentiality of events occurring on the surface of interaction.
As we come across members of other species in a variety of contexts in our societies, more needs to be known about the social dynamics of more-than-human interaction. Domesticated species such as dogs, cats, cows, horses, and different types of parrots, are known to be very competent actors in social interaction involving humans. Social interaction between humans and non-domesticated species, e.g., urban and garden birds, remains largely unstudied. Analyzing different types of interspecies encounters will add to our understanding of the extent of social interaction in multispecies environments. It has been suggested that turn-taking is a universal practice organizing interaction among humans. According to studies on coordinated animal exchanges, it goes beyond human communication and can be found in many non-human species' interactions. What happens in turn-taking and the overall co-construction of understanding when species meet?
For this Research Topic, we are looking for research articles that address the relations between human and non-human animals in social interaction. Authors can present supplementary material (e.g., video and audiotaped materials) and transcribe and analyze these with appropriate methods provided by conversation analysis, interactional studies (e.g., in ethology), or linguistics.
Suggested topics may include the following but are not limited to these:
• Non-human animals using their vocalizations when interacting with humans and humans answering to them, perhaps imitating animals.
• Organizing interspecies activities: playing, walking, hunting, eating, working, resting.
• The importance of gaze contact, distance, and touching in Human-Animal encounters: according to recent studies, shared gaze and touching are likely to increase positive feelings also in interspecies dyads.
References:
• Cornips, L. (2022). The animal turn in postcolonial (socio)linguistics: the interspecies greeting of dairy cow. Journal of Postcolonial lingustics 6, 210-232.
• Goode, D. (2007). Playing with My Dog Katie. An Ethnomethodological study of dog-human interaction. West Lafayette, Indiana: Purdue University Press.
• Goodwin, C. (2018). Co-Operative Action. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
• Harjunpää, K. (2022). Repetition and prosodic matching in responding to pets’ vocalizations. Langage et société, 2(176), 69-102. doi:10.3917/ls.176.0071.
• Heleski, C., Wickens, C., Minero, M., et al. (2015). Do soothing vocal cues enhance horses' ability to learn a frightening task? Journal of Veterinary Behavior 10(1), 41-47. doi:10.1016/j.jveb.2014.08.009.
• Heritage, J. (1984). Garfinkel and Ethnomethodology. Cambridge: Polity Press.
• Holler, J., Kendrick, K, H., Casillas, M., Levinson, S. C., eds. (2016). Turn-Taking in Human Communicative Interaction. Lausanne: Frontiers Media. doi:10.3389/978-2-88919-825-2.
• Laurier, E., Maze, R. & Lundin, J. (2006). Putting the dog back in the park: Animal and human mind-in-action. Mind, Culture, and Activity 13(1), 2-24, DOI: 10.1207/ s15327884mca1301_2.
• Logue, D., and Stivers, T. (2012). Squawk in interaction: a primer of conversation analysis for students of animal communication. Behaviour 149, 1283–1298. doi: 10.1163/1568539X-00003031.
• Lohi, H. & Simonen, M. (2021). Hugging and kissing a dog in distress. Litteraria Copernicana 37(1), 107-122. doi: 10.12775/LC.2021.007.
• MacMartin, C., Coe, J. B. & Adams, C. L. (2014). Treating distressed animals as participants: I know responses in veterinarians’ pet-directed talk. Research on Language and Social Interaction 47(2), 151-174.
• Mondada, L. (2018). Multiple temporalities of language and body in interaction: Challenges for transcribing multimodality. Research on Language and Social Interaction 51(1), 85-106.
• Mondémé, C. (2021). Why study turn-taking sequences in interspecies interactions?Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour 52(1), 67-85. doi.org:10.1111/jtsb.12295.
• Nagasawa, M., Shouhei, M., Shiori, E., et al. (2015). Oxytocin-gaze positive loop and the coevolution of human-dog bonds. Science 348(6232): 333-336.
• Peltola, R. (2018). Interspecies identification in nature observations. Modal expressions and open reference constructions with non-human animate reference in Finnish. In Nelson, D. & Vihman, V. (eds.) Effects of Animacy in Grammar and Cognition. Special Issue. Open Linguistics 4, 453–477. doi:10.1515/opli-2018-0023.
• Pepperberg, I. M. (2002). Cognitive and communicative abilities of grey parrots. Current Directions in Psychological Science 11(3), 83-87. doi:10.1016/j.applanim.2006.04.005.
• Pika, S., Wilkinson, R., Kendrick K. H., Vernes S.C. (2018). Taking turns: bridging the gap between human and animal communication. Proc. R. Soc. B 285: 20180598. doi:10.1098/rspb.2018.0598.
• Roberts, F. (2004). Speaking to and for animals in a veterinary clinic: A practice for managing interpersonal interaction. Research on Language and Social Interaction 37(4): 421-446.
• Rossano, F. (2013). Sequence organization and timing of bonobo mother-infant interactions. Interaction Studies 14(2), 160–189. doi.org:10.1075/is.14.2.02ros.
• Sacks, H., Schegloff, E. A. & Jefferson, G. (1974). A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation. Language 50(4), 696-735.
• Sanders, C. R. (1999). Understanding Dogs: Living and Working with Canine Companions. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.
• Schötz, S. (2020). Phonetic variation in cat–human communication. In: Sousa, A. C. A. & Pastorinho, M. R. (eds.) Pets as Sentinels, Forecasters and Promoters of Human Health, pp.319–347. Cham: Springer Nature Switzerland.
• Simonen, M. & Lohi, H. (2021). Interactional reciprocity in human-dog interaction. In: Lindström, J., Laury, R., Peräkylä, A. & Sorjonen, M.-L. (eds.) Intersubjectivity in Action: Studies in Language and Social Interaction, pp.397-428. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Pragmatics and Beyond New Series. doi:10.1075/pbns.326.18sim.
• Stivers T., Enfield, N. J., Brown P., et al. (2009). Universals and cultural variation in turn-taking in conversation. PNAS 106, 26: 10591. doi:10.1073/pnas.090361610.
• Tannen, D. (2004). Talking the dog: Framing pets as interactional resources in family discourse. Research on Language and Social Interaction 37(4), 399-420.
• Turner, D. C. (2021). The mechanisms of social interactions between cats and their owners. Frontiers in Veterinary Science 8:650143. doi:10.3389/fvets.2021.650143.
As we come across members of other species in a variety of contexts in our societies, more needs to be known about the social dynamics of more-than-human interaction. Domesticated species such as dogs, cats, cows, horses, and different types of parrots, are known to be very competent actors in social interaction involving humans. Social interaction between humans and non-domesticated species, e.g., urban and garden birds, remains largely unstudied. Analyzing different types of interspecies encounters will add to our understanding of the extent of social interaction in multispecies environments. It has been suggested that turn-taking is a universal practice organizing interaction among humans. According to studies on coordinated animal exchanges, it goes beyond human communication and can be found in many non-human species' interactions. What happens in turn-taking and the overall co-construction of understanding when species meet?
For this Research Topic, we are looking for research articles that address the relations between human and non-human animals in social interaction. Authors can present supplementary material (e.g., video and audiotaped materials) and transcribe and analyze these with appropriate methods provided by conversation analysis, interactional studies (e.g., in ethology), or linguistics.
Suggested topics may include the following but are not limited to these:
• Non-human animals using their vocalizations when interacting with humans and humans answering to them, perhaps imitating animals.
• Organizing interspecies activities: playing, walking, hunting, eating, working, resting.
• The importance of gaze contact, distance, and touching in Human-Animal encounters: according to recent studies, shared gaze and touching are likely to increase positive feelings also in interspecies dyads.
References:
• Cornips, L. (2022). The animal turn in postcolonial (socio)linguistics: the interspecies greeting of dairy cow. Journal of Postcolonial lingustics 6, 210-232.
• Goode, D. (2007). Playing with My Dog Katie. An Ethnomethodological study of dog-human interaction. West Lafayette, Indiana: Purdue University Press.
• Goodwin, C. (2018). Co-Operative Action. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
• Harjunpää, K. (2022). Repetition and prosodic matching in responding to pets’ vocalizations. Langage et société, 2(176), 69-102. doi:10.3917/ls.176.0071.
• Heleski, C., Wickens, C., Minero, M., et al. (2015). Do soothing vocal cues enhance horses' ability to learn a frightening task? Journal of Veterinary Behavior 10(1), 41-47. doi:10.1016/j.jveb.2014.08.009.
• Heritage, J. (1984). Garfinkel and Ethnomethodology. Cambridge: Polity Press.
• Holler, J., Kendrick, K, H., Casillas, M., Levinson, S. C., eds. (2016). Turn-Taking in Human Communicative Interaction. Lausanne: Frontiers Media. doi:10.3389/978-2-88919-825-2.
• Laurier, E., Maze, R. & Lundin, J. (2006). Putting the dog back in the park: Animal and human mind-in-action. Mind, Culture, and Activity 13(1), 2-24, DOI: 10.1207/ s15327884mca1301_2.
• Logue, D., and Stivers, T. (2012). Squawk in interaction: a primer of conversation analysis for students of animal communication. Behaviour 149, 1283–1298. doi: 10.1163/1568539X-00003031.
• Lohi, H. & Simonen, M. (2021). Hugging and kissing a dog in distress. Litteraria Copernicana 37(1), 107-122. doi: 10.12775/LC.2021.007.
• MacMartin, C., Coe, J. B. & Adams, C. L. (2014). Treating distressed animals as participants: I know responses in veterinarians’ pet-directed talk. Research on Language and Social Interaction 47(2), 151-174.
• Mondada, L. (2018). Multiple temporalities of language and body in interaction: Challenges for transcribing multimodality. Research on Language and Social Interaction 51(1), 85-106.
• Mondémé, C. (2021). Why study turn-taking sequences in interspecies interactions?Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour 52(1), 67-85. doi.org:10.1111/jtsb.12295.
• Nagasawa, M., Shouhei, M., Shiori, E., et al. (2015). Oxytocin-gaze positive loop and the coevolution of human-dog bonds. Science 348(6232): 333-336.
• Peltola, R. (2018). Interspecies identification in nature observations. Modal expressions and open reference constructions with non-human animate reference in Finnish. In Nelson, D. & Vihman, V. (eds.) Effects of Animacy in Grammar and Cognition. Special Issue. Open Linguistics 4, 453–477. doi:10.1515/opli-2018-0023.
• Pepperberg, I. M. (2002). Cognitive and communicative abilities of grey parrots. Current Directions in Psychological Science 11(3), 83-87. doi:10.1016/j.applanim.2006.04.005.
• Pika, S., Wilkinson, R., Kendrick K. H., Vernes S.C. (2018). Taking turns: bridging the gap between human and animal communication. Proc. R. Soc. B 285: 20180598. doi:10.1098/rspb.2018.0598.
• Roberts, F. (2004). Speaking to and for animals in a veterinary clinic: A practice for managing interpersonal interaction. Research on Language and Social Interaction 37(4): 421-446.
• Rossano, F. (2013). Sequence organization and timing of bonobo mother-infant interactions. Interaction Studies 14(2), 160–189. doi.org:10.1075/is.14.2.02ros.
• Sacks, H., Schegloff, E. A. & Jefferson, G. (1974). A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation. Language 50(4), 696-735.
• Sanders, C. R. (1999). Understanding Dogs: Living and Working with Canine Companions. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.
• Schötz, S. (2020). Phonetic variation in cat–human communication. In: Sousa, A. C. A. & Pastorinho, M. R. (eds.) Pets as Sentinels, Forecasters and Promoters of Human Health, pp.319–347. Cham: Springer Nature Switzerland.
• Simonen, M. & Lohi, H. (2021). Interactional reciprocity in human-dog interaction. In: Lindström, J., Laury, R., Peräkylä, A. & Sorjonen, M.-L. (eds.) Intersubjectivity in Action: Studies in Language and Social Interaction, pp.397-428. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Pragmatics and Beyond New Series. doi:10.1075/pbns.326.18sim.
• Stivers T., Enfield, N. J., Brown P., et al. (2009). Universals and cultural variation in turn-taking in conversation. PNAS 106, 26: 10591. doi:10.1073/pnas.090361610.
• Tannen, D. (2004). Talking the dog: Framing pets as interactional resources in family discourse. Research on Language and Social Interaction 37(4), 399-420.
• Turner, D. C. (2021). The mechanisms of social interactions between cats and their owners. Frontiers in Veterinary Science 8:650143. doi:10.3389/fvets.2021.650143.
Keywords: social interaction, interspecies interaction, relation, conversation analysis, linguistics, interspecies pragmatics
Important Note: All contributions to this Research Topic must be within the scope of the section and journal to which they are submitted, as defined in their mission statements. Frontiers reserves the right to guide an out-of-scope manuscript to a more suitable section or journal at any stage of peer review.
