Relational Methodologies for Mobile Literacies: Intra-action, Rhythm, and Atmosphere



In this chapter, we develop methods of interaction analysis to address how contemporary new media making with iPads and other mobile devices involves the body, its mobilities, and its inextricable relationship to place. To analyze the social, cultural, and (im)material assemblages that emerge during mobile new media making with iPads, we pivot from interaction to intra-action in order to feel and move alongside the numerous bodies that come together—and affect one another—in experiences of making new media. In contrast to interaction analysis, intra-action analysis contests anthropocentric notions of being and place that stabilize on the human as the center of all reality. Providing an example of intra-action analysis, we therefore disrupt the common human-centered interactional perspectives on new media making in literacy studies. The application of our developed method to a case of adolescents making an iPad-produced digital book trailer illustrates the potential of intra-action analysis to illuminate new media making as an emergent, felt, and relational process of bodies moving within and across multiple production settings


  1. Anderson, Ben. 2015. Neoliberal affects. Progress in Human Geography.Google Scholar
  2. Barad, Karen. 2007. Meeting the universe halfway: Quantum physics and the entanglement of matter and meaning. Duke University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Barad, Karen. 2012. Intra-actions: An interview with Karen Barad/Interviewer: Kleinmann, Adam. Mousse Magazine 32: 76–81.Google Scholar
  4. Braidotti, Rosi. 2013. The posthuman. London: Wiley.Google Scholar
  5. Dawney, Liela. 2013. The interruption: Investigating subjectivation and affect. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space 31 (4): 628–644.Google Scholar
  6. Dewey, John. 1934. Art as experience. New York: Penguin.Google Scholar
  7. Edensor, Tim, and Julian Holloway. 2008. Rhythmanalysing the coach tour: The ring of Kerry, Ireland. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers 33 (4): 483–501.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Edensor, Tim. 2012. Illuminated atmospheres: Anticipating and reproducing the flow of affective experience in Blackpool. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space 30 (6): 1103–1122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Edensor, Tim. 2015. Producing atmospheres at the match: Fan cultures, commercialisation and mood management in English football. Emotion, Space and Society 15: 82–89.Google Scholar
  10. Ehret, Christian, and Ty Hollett. 2013. (Re)placing school: Fifth-graders’ counter-mobilities while composing with mobile devices in a digital media enrichment class. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy 57 (2): 110–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Ehret, Christian, and Ty Hollett. 2014. Embodied composition in real virtualities: Adolescents’ literacy practices and felt experiences moving with digital, mobile devices in school. Research in the Teaching of English 48 (4): 428–452.Google Scholar
  12. Ehret, Christian, and Ty Hollett. 2016. Affective dimensions of participatory design research in informal learning environments: Placemaking, belonging, and correspondence. Cognition and Instruction 34 (3): 250–258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Ehret, Christian, Ty Hollett and Robin Jocius. 2016. The matter of new media making: An intra-action analysis of adolescents making a digital book trailer. Journal of Literacy Research 48 (3): 346–377.Google Scholar
  14. Fors, Vaike. 2015. Sensory experiences of digital photo-sharing: ‘Mundane frictions’ and emerging learning strategies. Journal of Aesthetics & Culture 7.Google Scholar
  15. Haraway, Donna. 2013. Simians, cyborgs, and women: The reinvention of nature. Routledge: Abingdon.Google Scholar
  16. Hollett, Ty, and Christian Ehret. 2015. Bean’s World: (Mine)crafting affective atmospheres for gameplay, learning and care in a children’s hospital. New Media & Society 17 (11): 1849–1866.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hollett, Ty and Christian Ehret. 2016. Civic rhythms in a media-rich, informal learning program. Learning, Media and Technology. Online before print.Google Scholar
  18. Jordan, Brigitte, and A. Austin Henderson. 1995. Interaction analysis: Foundations and practice. The Journal of the Learning Sciences 4 (1): 39–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Lefebvre, Henri. 1991. The production of space. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  20. Lefebvre, Henri. 2004. Rhythmanalysis: Space, time and everyday life. London: Continnum.Google Scholar
  21. Manning, Erin. 2016. The minor gesture. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. McCormack, Derrick. 2013. Refrains for moving bodies: Experience and experiment in affective spaces. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
  23. McCormack, Derrick. 2014. Atmospheric things and circumstantial excursions. Cultural Geographies 21 (4): 605–625.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Pink, Sarah, and Kerstin Leder Mackley. 2016. Moving, making and atmosphere: Routines of home as sites for mundane improvisation. Mobilities 11 (2): 171–187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Sachar, Louis. (2008). Holes. Macmillan: New York.Google Scholar
  26. Stephens, Closs Angaharad. 2016. The affective atmospheres of nationalism. Cultural Geographies 23 (2): 181–198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.The Pennsylvania State UniversityPennsylvaniaUSA
  2. 2.McGill UniversityMontrealCanada

Personalised recommendations