How does speaker selection change when one of the participants is wearing a VR headset?
Tim Greer
Kobe University
In courtrooms, a sidebar is when the judge and lawyers talk privately, so as not to be heard by the jury. Usually this means putting the main topic on hold in order to work out some matter that is consequential for the ongoing public talk. In other words, it is a sort of embedded or post-expansive sequence designed primarily for a subset of the participants.
Similarly, language learning tasks, such as roleplays, interactional puzzles and information-gap activities, often involve one knowing participant speaking to two or more unknowing recipients . In such situations, the unknowing participants may occasionally use sidebar strategies to discuss elements of the task before presenting them to the other person.
We have seen this in the TGG role-plays, for example, when two learners go up to the counter to talk to the agent (who is playing the role of a server or a pharmacist). Each learner has their own mission card, but the fact that they come up in pairs provides an affordance that allows them to consult their peer in moments of need, such as when they don’t understand a word. Those brief sidebar whispers ultimately facilitate the successful continuation of the main task, even though they temporarily dis-address the agent.
I have noticed a similar phenomenon happening in VR data we have collected. When the three friends are playing a game where they simulate defusing a bomb (“Keep Talking and Nobody Explodes”), Shun is wearing the headset and can see the bomb, while Feng and Tuah can only see the bomb-defusal manual. They must provide Shun with instructions on how to defuse the bomb based on the information he relays to them. For instance, in the following sequence Shun is trying describe the symbols on some buttons. Feng and Tuah have to identify the symbols on a table they have in front of them then tell Shun the correct order in which to press them. In this segment, Shun depicts one of the symbols as “the goal of a basketball” (line 36), but there are two symbols that could conceivably fit that description. The side talk comes in lines 42 and 48.
34 SHUN (0.3) uh hh uh li:ke uh (0.9)
35 TUAH? ooh=
36 SHUN =ah: |y’know the goal of |basketball.
s-bh |circles
s-rh |clicks ¶ button
37 |(0.7)
s-rh |hovers over ¶ button-->
38 FENG basketball
39 [˚g o a l of ah-˚ ]
40 TUAH [o:|:h (‘n) |this one?] okay,
t-lh |points to Ѭ ----------->
s-rh ............|over timer-->
41 |(0.4)
t-lh |points from Ѭ to ¶ --->
42 TUAH? |[wh˚this o(ne)˚wh]
t-lh |¶------>
43 SHUN [ a : n d ] the last one i::s (0.7)
44 FENG | (0.2)|˚eh?˚ |(0.2)
t-lh |¶~~~| Ѭ~~~|¶--->
45 SHUN uh[: : : :]|[::m] >|how d’ |say<
46 TUAH [˚no(h)˚]|
t-lh |Ѭ ~~~| ¶ ~~~| Ѭ--->
47 FENG? [.hh]
48 FENG wh˚(uh) |maybe this:.˚wh
f-rh ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,|points to ¶ -->
s-rh ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,-->
49 |(0.2)|(0.7)
f-rh |----- |.....
s-rh |,,,,, |clicks Ѭ button-->
50 SHUN |li:ke uh: |(1.7) |hmmm. |(0.7)|(0.9)
t-lh |Ѭ--------------------------------|.......|bottom of 3rd row-->
s-rh |------------|.....
s-lh |raises
s-px |leans in
As shown in this transcript, there are two related threads of talk in this sequence: The first involves all three participants while the second only involves Tuah and Feng. As part of his ongoing project to describe the symbols, Shun calls the symbol on one button a “basketball goal”. Tuah initially receipts that in line 40 in a way that is hearable to Shun as a claim that Tuah has identified the appropriate symbol. However, Tuah then notices another symbol that could also conceivably be a basketball hoop (line 41), and so the question in line 42 appears to be directed at Feng, the only other person who has directed access to the complete list of possible symbols. It is delivered in a whispering voice, which helps formulate it as background talk that is not for Shun, who of course has no visual access to the symbols that Tuah is talking about (and which are referred to with the indexical “this one” and a point).
Likewise, Feng’s whispered response (line 48, “uh maybe this”) is contingent on being able to see what is being pointed to, and therefore momentarily deselects Shun from the conversation. Notice also that in this case, Shun continues the main thread of talk, going on to describe the next symbol and therefore does not recognize the side-barred talk as relevant to him.
The affordances of the VR set in this particular game make this sort of momentary repartitioning of the participant constellation both possible and consequential for the way the interactional project at hand.
Comments