It takes two to (mis)understand: A conversation analytic investigation of interactional repair in autistic adults

This project investigates interaction involving autistic adults. Specifically, it analyses troubles relating to assumptions of common ground (Clark 1996), information management, and the structural phenomenon of other-initiated repair – largely fourth position repair (Schegloff, 1992) – initiated by autistic people and its role in the display of (mis)understanding and shared knowledge. Misunderstandings can also have implications for face (Goffman, 1967), and so the interpersonal aspects of repair will also be investigated. The data this paper draws upon is Map Task interaction between autistic adults and familiar friends/partners. The Map Task is an interactional task which involves one participant instructing the other to follow a route across a similar but slightly different map (see Turner & Merrison, 2016). It is a task specifically designed to elicit misunderstandings, and therefore provides a rich data set in which to find and thereby analyse repair sequences. Much of the previous research on autism and repair has focused on sequences initiated by allistic (non-autistic) individuals when interacting with autistic individuals, and autistic individuals’ responses to repair initiators (Volden, 2004) rather than sequences initiated by autistic individuals. There is therefore something of a gap in the existing literature. Whilst there is research which suggests that the need to repair occurs more frequently for autistic people (Dobbinson et al, 1998), this paper explores the structure behind such sequences. This paper aims to shed light on what conversation analysis has to offer in terms of dispelling some of the misconceptions surrounding autistic people and their communicative (dis)abilities by investigating the sequential organisation of repair in autistic interaction. In the current social climate, which tends towards awareness rather than acceptance, autism is often seen as a deficit, and communicative breakdowns are often dismissed as a fault of the autistic person. The interim findings from this study indicate, however, that misunderstandings (and with that, communicative ‘trouble’) in autistic interaction is in fact ‘mutually achieved’. Clark, Herbert H. (1996). Using language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Dobbinson, S, Perkins, M. R. & Boucher, J. (1998). Structural patterns in conversations with a woman who has autism. Journal of Communication Disorders. Vol. 31(2). 113-134. Goffman, E. (1967 [1955]). On Face Work. Goffman, E. and Best, J. (Eds.) Interaction Ritual: Essays on Face-to-Face Behavior. New Brunswick; London. Transaction Publishers. pp. 5–46. Turner, G. & Merrison A. J. (2016) Doing ‘Understanding’ in Dialogue Interpreting. Interpreting. Vol. 18(2). pp. 137–171. Schegloff, E. A. (1992). Repair After Next Turn: The Last Structurally Provided Defense of Intersubjectivity in Conversation. American Journal of Sociology. Vol. 97(5). pp. 1295–1345. Volden, J. (2004). Conversational repair in speakers with autism spectrum disorder. International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders. Vol. 39(2). pp. 171-89.