Least Collaborative Effort
The theory of least collaborative effort asserts that participants in a contribution try to minimize the total effort spent on that contribution – in both the presentation and acceptance phases. In exact, every participants in a conversation tries to minimize the total effort spent in that interactional encounter. The ideal utterances are informative and brief.
Participants in conversation refashion referring expressions and decrease conversation length. When interactants are trying to pick out difficult to describe shapes from a set of similar items, they produce and agree on an expression which is understood and accepted by both and this process is termed refashioning. The following is an example from Clark & Wilkes-Gibbs,
- A: Um, third one is the guy reading with, holding his book to the left
- B: Okay, kind of standing up?
- A: Yeah.
- B: Okay.
A offers a conceptualisation which is refashioned slightly by the B before it is agreed on by both. In later repetitions of the task, the expression employed to re-use the agreed conceptualisation progressively became shorter. For example, “the next one looks like a person who’s ice skating, except they’re sticking out two arms in front” (trial 1) was gradually shortened to “The next one’s the ice skater” (trial 4) and eventually became just “The ice skater” in trial 6.
Clark & Wilkes-Gibbs argue that there are two indicators of least collaborative effort in the above example. First, the process of refashioning itself involves less work than A having to produce a ‘perfect’ referring expression first time, because of the degree of effort which would be needed to achieve that. Second, the decrease in length of the referring expressions and the concomitant reduction in conversation length over the trials showed that the participants were exploiting their increased common ground to decrease the amount of talk needed, and thus their collaborative effort.
- Time pressures: Parties will select more effortful means of communication when mutual understanding must occur within a fixed amount of time.
- Errors: Parties will select more effortful means of communication when the chance for error is high or previous low effort communications have resulted in error.
- Ignorance: Parties will engage in more effortful communication when a lack of shared knowledge is notable.
Time pressures, errors, and ignorance are problems that are best remedied by mutual understanding, thus the theory of grounding in communication dispels the theory of least collaborative effort in instances where grounding is the solution to a communication problem.
Other articles related to "collaborative":
... Some improvisational writing is collaborative, focusing on an almost dadaist form of collaborative fiction ... with each writing a sentence, to coded environments that focus on collaborative novel-writing, like OtherSpace ...
... Collaborative engineering is defined by the International Journal of Collaborative Engineering as a discipline that "studies the interactive process of engineering ...
... The need for collaborative leadership is being recognised in more and more areas Public Private Partnerships Global Supply Chains Civic collaboration to solve complex community problems On-line ... found that relationship management and collaborative leadership were the top two qualities or capabilities that Directors of organisations involved in large business partnerships would have liked ...
... Recently online platforms have embraced opening collaborative user generation of lists to the general public ...
Famous quotes containing the word effort:
“But the effort, the effort! And as the marrow is eaten out of a mans bones and the soul out of his belly, contending with the strange rapacity of savage life, the lower stage of creation, he cannot make the effort any more.”
—D.H. (David Herbert)