Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33519050›Full record

ArticleJournal of pragmatics2021

Whose turn is it anyway? Latency and the organization of turn-taking in video-mediated interaction.

Lucas M Seuren, Joseph Wherton, Trisha Greenhalgh, Sara E Shaw

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of pragmatics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

18 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Beyond productivity: aBMJ digital health & AI · 2026
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. How video calls affect mimicry and trust during interactions.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2023
    Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Patient-clinician communication research for 21st century health care.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2022
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Lucas M SeurenNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, United Kingdom.
Joseph WhertonNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, United Kingdom.
Trisha GreenhalghNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, United Kingdom.
Sara E ShawNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, United Kingdom.

Funding

Department of Health PB-PG-1216-20012
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Latency in video-mediated interaction can frustrate smooth turn-taking: it may cause participants to perceive silence at points where talk should occur, it may cause them to talk in overlap, and it impedes their ability to return to one-speaker-at-a-time. Whilst potentially frustrating for participants, this makes video-mediated interaction a perspicuous setting for the study of social interaction: it is an environment that nurtures the occurrence of turn-taking problems. For this paper, we conducted secondary analysis of 25 video consultations recorded for heart failure, (antenatal) diabetes, and cancer services in the UK. By comparing video recordings of the patient's and clinician's side of the call, we provide a detailed analysis of how latency interferes with the turn-taking system, how participants understand problems, and how they address them. We conclude that in our data latency unnoticed until it becomes problematic: participants act as if they share the same reality.

Indexed as

Conversation analysisOverlapping talkTurn-takingVideo consultationsVideo-mediated interaction

Identifiers

PMID33519050
PMCPMC7819463

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.