Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Producing Knowledge with Digital Technologies in Sibling Interaction

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Children’s Knowledge-in-Interaction

  • 936 Accesses

Abstract

This chapter examines the interactional methods by which two young siblings coproduce knowledge with digital technologies at home. It highlights how the older child’s sharing of alphabetic literacy knowledge to help her brother use an iPhone application (app) is closely related to her organization of the interaction. During the course of interaction the older child accounts for the appearance of her actions in demonstrating her knowledge and employs interactional and technological resources to socially accomplish the sharing of knowledge with her brother. Analysis reveals the sophisticated means by which the children coproduce literacy knowledge in situ in their activities using technologies in the home.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 119.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 159.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 159.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Aarsand, P. A. (2007). Computer and video games in family life: The digital divide as a resource in intergenerational interactions. Childhood, 14(2), 235–256.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Atkinson, J. M., & Heritage, J. (1984). Jefferson’s transcript notation. In J. M. Atkinson & J. Heritage (Eds.), Structures of social action: Studies in conversation analysis (pp. ix–xvi). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bolinger, D. L. (1958). Interrogative structures of American English. Tuscaloosa, AL: University of Alabama Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buckingham, D., & Scanlon, M. (2002). Education, edutainment and learning in the home. Cambridge, England: Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Busch, G. (2011). The social orders of family mealtime. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cekaite, A. (2010). Shepherding the child: Embodied directive sequences in parent-child interactions. Talk and Text, 30(1), 1–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Craven, A., & Potter, J. (2010). Directives: Entitlement and contingency in action. Discourse Studies, 12(4), 419–442.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Curl, T., & Drew, P. (2008). Contingency and action: A comparison of two forms of requesting. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 41(2), 129–153.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Danby, S., & Baker, C. D. (1998). How to be masculine in the block area. Childhood, 5(2), 151–175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davidson, C. (2009). Young children’s engagement with digital texts and literacies in the home: Pressing matters for the teaching of English in the early years of schooling. English Teaching: Practice and Critique, 8(3), 36–54.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davidson, C. (2010). ‘Click on the big red car’: The social accomplishment of playing a Wiggles computer game. Convergence: The International Journal of Research into New Technologies, 16(4), 375–394.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davidson, C. (2012). The social organisation of help during young children’s use of the computer. Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood, 13(3), 187–199.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Filipi, A. (2009). Toddler and parent interaction: The organisation of gaze, pointing and vocalisation. Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Garfinkel, H. (1967). Studies in ethnomethodology. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodwin, C. (1981). Conversational organization: Interaction between speakers and hearers. New York, NY: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodwin, C. (1986). Between and within: Alternative treatments of continuers and assessments. Human Studies, 9(2), 205–217.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goodwin, M. H. (2007). Occasioned knowledge exploration in family interaction. Discourse and Society, 18(1), 93–110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goodwin, M. H., & Cekaite, A. (2013). Calibration in directive/response sequences in family interaction. Journal of Pragmatics, 46(1), 122–138.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gregory, E. (2001). Sisters and brothers as language and literacy teachers: Synergy between siblings playing and working together. Journal of Early Childhood Literacy, 1(3), 301–322.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gregory, E. (2005). Guiding lights: Siblings as literacy teachers in a multilingual community. In J. Anderson & M. Kendrick (Eds.), Portraits of literacy across families, communities and schools: Intersections and tensions. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gregory, E. (2008). Learning to read in a new language: Making sense of words and worlds (2nd ed.). London, England: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heritage, J. (1984). A change-of-state token and aspects of its sequential placement. In J. M. Atkinson & J. Heritage (Eds.), Structures of social action: Studies in conversation analysis (pp. 299–345). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kärkkäinen, E., & Keisanen, T. (2012). Linguistic and embodied formats for making (concrete) offers. Discourse Studies, 14(5), 587–611.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kendon, A. (1985). Behavioral foundations for the process of frame attunement in face-to-face interaction. In G. P. Ginsberg, M. Brenner, & M. von Cranach (Eds.), Discovery strategies in the psychology of action (pp. 229–253). London, England: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kendon, A. (1990). Conducting interaction: Patterns of behavior in focused encounters. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kent, A. (2012). Compliance, resistance and incipient compliance when responding to directives. Discourse Studies, 14(6), 711–730.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kidwell, M. (2013). Availability as a trouble source in directive-response sequences. In M. Hayashi, G. Raymond, & J. Sidnell (Eds.), Conversational repair and human understanding (pp. 234–260). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kidwell, M., & Zimmerman, D. (2007). Joint attention as action. Journal of Pragmatics, 39(3), 592–611.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lerner, G. H. (2003). Selecting next speaker: The context-sensitive operation of a context-free organisation. Language in Society, 32(2), 177–201.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lerner, G. H., & Zimmerman, D. H. (2003). Action and the appearance of action in the conduct of very young children. In P. J. Glenn, C. D. LeBaron, & J. Mandelbaum (Eds.), Studies in language and social interaction: In honor of Robert Hopper (pp. 441–547). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lerner, G. H., Zimmerman, D. H., & Kidwell, M. (2011). Formal structures of practical tasks: A resource for action in the social life of very young children. In J. Streeck, C. Goodwin, & C. LeBaron (Eds.), Embodied interaction: Language and body in the material world (pp. 44–58). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maynard, D. W. (1980). Placement of topic changes in conversation. Semiotica, 49(3–4), 263–290.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maynard, D. W. (1985). How children start arguments. Language and Society, 14(1), 1–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pomerantz, A. (1984). Agreeing and disagreeing with assessments: Some features of preferred/dispreferred turn shapes. In J. M. Atkinson & J. Heritage (Eds.), Structures of social action: Studies in conversation analysis (pp. 57–101). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sacks, H. (1995). In G. Jefferson (Ed.), Lectures on conversation: Volumes 1 & 2. Oxford, England: Basil Blackwell.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Sacks, H., & Schegloff, E. A. (2002). Home position. Gesture, 2(2), 133–146.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schegloff, E. A. (1968). Sequencing in conversational openings. American Anthropologist, 70(6), 1075–1095.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schegloff, E. A. (1987). Analyzing single episodes of interaction: An exercise in conversation analysis. Social Psychology Quarterly, 50(2), 101–114.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schegloff, E. A. (2007). Sequence organization in interaction: A primer in conversation analysis. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Scott, M. B., & Lyman, S. M. (1968). Accounts. American Sociological Review, 33(1), 46–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Streeck, J. (2009). Forward-gesturing. Discourse Processes, 46(2–3), 161–179.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Takada, A. (2013). Generating morality in directive sequences: Distinctive strategies for developing communicative competence in Japanese caregiver-child interactions. Language and Communication, 33(4), 420–438.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Takada, A., & Endo, T. (2015). Object transfer in request-accept sequences in Japanese caregiver-child interactions. Journal of Pragmatics, 82, 52–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wootton, A. J. (1981). Children’s use of address terms. In P. French & M. MacLure (Eds.), Adult-child conversation (pp. 142–158). London, England: Croom Helm.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wootton, A. J. (1994). Object transfer, intersubjectivity and 3rd position repair: Early developmental observations of one child. Journal of Child Language, 21(3), 543–564.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

I am grateful to Dr. Christina Davidson and Dr. Christine Edwards-Groves for their thoughtful comments and feedback on the transcription and analysis of the data.

The project “Interacting with knowledge, interacting with people: Web searching in early childhood” was funded by the Australian Research Council (DP110104227). The Chief Investigators are Susan Danby, Karen Thorpe, and Christina Davidson. The project was approved by the human research ethics committees of Queensland University of Technology (Ref No: 1100001480) and Charles Sturt University (Ref No: 2012/40). We thank the teachers, children, and families of the Crèche and Kindergarten Association for their participation in this study.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Education, Charles Sturt University, Wagga Wagga, Australia

    Brooke Scriven

Authors
  1. Brooke Scriven
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Brooke Scriven .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Education, The University of Waikato, Hamilton, Waikato, New Zealand

    Amanda Bateman

  2. Melbourne Graduate School of Education, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia

    Amelia Church

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer Science+Business Media Singapore

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Scriven, B. (2017). Producing Knowledge with Digital Technologies in Sibling Interaction. In: Bateman, A., Church, A. (eds) Children’s Knowledge-in-Interaction. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-1703-2_17

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-1703-2_17

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore

  • Print ISBN: 978-981-10-1701-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-981-10-1703-2

  • eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation