Capturing love at a distance
Multisensoriality in intimate video calls between migrant parents and their left-behind children
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.7146/si.v4i3.128148Keywords:
video calls, intimacy, intimate relationships, video analysis, multisensorialityAbstract
Studies have shown that multisensorial interactions are an important medium for achieving love and intimacy. Nevertheless, the question remains: How do people constitute their “love at a distance” when they can only interact with each other over a video call, in which certain sensorial resources (e.g., touch, smell, and taste) are not available? Drawing from two years of video-based fieldwork involving recordings of habitual calls among the members of migrant families, I consider the application of Ethnomethodology and Conversation Analysis (EMCA)-informed video analysis to investigating intimate relationships constructed through remote means. I present an innovative method of video recording that allows me to analyze the interactional resources toward which participants orient themselves in their calls. I illustrate this approach with data analysis to demonstrate the relevance of video to examining intimacy at a distance. This article proposes that a distinct contribution of video-based research to the discipline lies in its ability to capture how people use their embodied and sensorial interactions to form intimacy across distances.
References
ACWF (All China Women’s Federation). (2013). Research report on the situation of rural left-behind China, rural-urban migration children in China [In Chinese]. Zhong Guo Fu Yun (Chinese Women’s Movement), 6, 30–34.
Ames, M. G., Go, J., Kaye, J. ‘Jofish’, & Spasojevic, M. (2010). Making love in the network closet: The benefits and work of family videochat. Proceedings of the 2010 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 145–154. New York, USA: ACM.
Beck, U., & Beck-Gernsheim, E. (2014). Distant Love: Personal Life in the Global Age. Cambridge: Polity.
Bonu, B. (2007). Connexion continue et interaction ouverte en réunion visiophonique. Reseaux, 144(5), 25–57.
Bourdieu, P. (1977). Outline of a Theory of Practice (R. Nice Trans.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Castle, S., & Miller, M. J. (2003). The Age of Migration. Nueva York, Guilford.
Cekaite, A. (2010). Shepherding the child: Embodied directive sequences in parent–child interactions. Text & Talk, 30(1), 1–25.
Cekaite, A. (2018). Intimate Skin-To-Skin Touch in Social Encounters: Lamination of Embodied Intertwinings. In Favareau, D. (Ed.) Co-operative Engagements in Intertwined Semiosis: Essays in Honour of Charles Goodwin (pp. 37–41). Tartu: University of Tartu Press.
Cekaite, C. (2020). Ethnomethodological approaches, In Vannini, P. (Ed.) The Routledge International Handbook of Ethnographic Film and Video (pp. 83-94). Oxon, OX: Routledge.
Cekaite, A., & Kvist Holm, M. (2017). The Comforting Touch: Tactile Intimacy and Talk in Managing Children’s Distress. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 50(2), 109–127.
Crabtree, A., Hemmings, T., Rodden, T., Bb, N. N., Cheverst, K., Clarke, K., & Hughes, J. (2003). Designing with care: Adapting cultural probes to inform design in sensitive settings. Ergonomics Society of Australia, 4–13.
de Fornel, M. (1994). Le cadre interactionnel de l’échange visiophonique. Réseaux, 12(64), 107–132.
de León, L. (1998). The Emergent Participant: Interactive Patterns in the Socialization of Tzotzil (Mayan) Infants. Journal of Linguistic Anthropology, 8(2), 131–161.
Smith, M. (2021). Occupying and Projecting Participant Perspectives in Open, Unstructured Spaces. Social Interaction. Video-Based Studies of Human Sociality, 4(3).
Frijhoff, W. T. M. (1991). The kiss sacred and profane: Reflections on a cross-cultural confrontation. In Bremmer, J., & Roodenburg, H. (eds.) A Cultural History of Gesture from Antiquity to the Present Day: With an Introduction by Sir Keith Thomas (pp. 210–236). Polity Press.
Gan, Y., Greiffenhagen, C., & Reeves, S. (2020). Connecting Distributed Families: Camera Work for Three-party Mobile Video Calls. Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 1–12. New York, USA: ACM.
Garfinkel, H. (1967). Studies in Ethnomethodology. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Garfinkel, H. (2002). Ethnomethodology’s Program: Working Out Durkheim’s Aphorism. Lanham, Md.: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
Glenn, P., & Holt, E. (2015). Laughter. In Tracy, K., Ilie, C., & Sandel, T. (Eds). The International Encyclopedia of Language and Social Interaction (pp. 1-6). JohnWiley & Sons.
Goffman, E. (1971). Relations in Public: Microstudies of the Public Order. New York: Harper & Row.
Goodwin, C. (1993). Recording human interaction in natural settings. Pragmatics: International Pragmatics Association, 3(2), 181–209.
Goodwin, C., (2000). Action and embodiment within situated human interaction. Journal of Pragmatics, 32, 1489-1522.
Goodwin, M. H. (2017). Haptic Sociality: The Embodied Interactive Constitution of Intimacy Through Touch. In Heath, C., Streeck, J., & Jordan, S. (eds.) Intercorporeality: Emerging Socialities in Interaction (pp. 73–102). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Goodwin, M. H., & Cekaite, A. (2013). Calibration in directive/response sequences in family interaction. Journal of Pragmatics, 46(1), 122–138.
Haddington, P., Mondada, L., & Nevile, M. (Eds.). (2013). Interaction and Mobility: Language and the Body in Motion. Berlin, Germany: Walter de gruyter.
Heath, C., Hindmarsh, J., & Luff, P. (2010). Video in Qualitative Research. Sage.
Heath, C., & Luff, P. (1992). Media Space and Communicative Asymmetries: Preliminary Observations of Video-Mediated Interaction. Human–Computer Interaction, 7(3), 315–346.
Hindmarsh, J., & Llewellyn, N. (2018). Video in Sociomaterial Investigations: A Solution to the Problem of Relevance for Organizational Research. Organizational Research Methods, 21(2), 412–437.
Katila, J. (2018). Touch between child and mother as an affective practice. In Juvonen T. & Kolehmainen,M. (Eds.) Affective Inequalities in Intimate Relationships. Routledge.
Katz, J. E., & Aakhus, M. (2002). Perpetual Contact: Mobile Communication, Private Talk, Public Performance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kinnunen, T., & Kolehmainen, M. (2019). Touch and Affect: Analysing the Archive of Touch Biographies. Body & Society, 25(1), 29–56.
Licoppe, C. (2004). ‘Connected’ Presence: The Emergence of a New Repertoire for Managing Social Relationships in a Changing Communication Technoscape. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 22(1), 135–156.
Licoppe, C. (2012). Understanding mediated appearances and their proliferation: The case of the phone rings and the ‘crisis of the summons’. New Media & Society, 14(7), 1073–1091.
Licoppe, C. (2017). Skype appearances, multiple greetings and ‘coucou’: The sequential organization of video-mediated conversation openings. Pragmatics, 27(3), 351–386.
Licoppe, C., & Dumoulin, L. (2007). L’ouverture des procès à distance par visioconférence. Reseaux, 144(5), 103–140.
Licoppe, C., & Morel, J. (2012). Video-in-Interaction: “Talking Heads” and the Multimodal Organization of Mobile and Skype Video Calls. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 45(4), 399–429.
Longhurst, R. (2013). Using Skype to mother: Bodies, emotions, visuality, and screens. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 31(4), 664–679.
Madianou, M., & Miller, D. (2012). Migration and New Media: Transnational Families and Polymedia. London: Routledge.
Mandelbaum, J. (2003). Interactive methods for constructing relationships. In Glenn, P. LeBaron, C. D., & Mandelbaum, J. (Eds.) Studies in Language and Social Interaction: In Honor of Robert Hopper (pp. 207–219). New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
McIlvenny, P., Broth, M., & Haddington, P. (2009). Communicating place, space and mobility. Journal of Pragmatics, 10(41), 1879-1886.
Meyer, C., Streeck, J., & Jordan, S. J. (2017). Intercorporeality: Emerging Socialities in Interaction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Mlynář, J., González-Martínez, E., & Lalanne, D. (2018). Situated Organization of Video-Mediated Interaction: A Review of Ethnomethodological and Conversation Analytic Studies. Interacting with Computers, 30(2), 73–84.
Mondada, L. (2004). Téléchirurgie et nouvelles pratiques professionnelles: Les enjeux interactionnels d’opérations chirurgicales réalisées par visioconférence. Sciences Sociales et Santé, 22(1), 95–126.
Mondada, L. (2007). Imbrications de la technologie et de l’ordre interactionnel. Reseaux, 144(5), 141–182.
Mondada, L., (2014). The local constitution of multimodal resources for social interaction. Journal of Pragmatics, 65, 137-156.
Mondada, L. (2015). Ouverture et préouverture des réunions visiophoniques. Reseaux, 194(6), 39–84.
Mondada, L. (2019). Contemporary issues in conversation analysis: Embodiment and materiality, multimodality and multisensoriality in social interaction. Journal of Pragmatics, 145, 47–62.
Mondada, L., Bouaouina, S., Camus, L., Gauthier, G., Svensson, H., Tekin, B. (2021). The local and filmed accountability of sensorial practices: The intersubjectivity of touch as an interactional achievement. Paper prepared for Social Interaction. Video-Based Studies of Human Sociality, 4(3).
Morgan, D. H. G. (2011). Locating ‘Family Practices’: Sociological Research Online, 16(4), 174-182.
Nevile, M. (2015). The embodied turn in research on language and social interaction. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 48(2), 121-151.
Oreglia, E., & Kaye, J. J. (2012). A gift from the city: Mobile phones in rural China. In Proceedings of the ACM 2012 conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work (pp. 137-146). New York: ACM.
Parreñas, R. (2005). Long distance intimacy: Class, gender and intergenerational relations between mothers and children in Filipino transnational families. Global Networks, 5(4), 317–336.
Peng, Y., & Wong, O. M. H. (2016). Who Takes Care of My Left-Behind Children? Migrant Mothers and Caregivers in Transnational Child Care. Journal of Family Issues, 37(14), 2021–2044.
Pomerantz, A., & Mandelbaum, J. (2005). Conversation analytic approaches to the relevance and uses of relationship categories in interaction. In Fitch K. L. & Sanders, R. E. (eds.,) Handbook of Language and Social Interaction (pp. 149–171). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Raudaskoski, P. (2000). The use of communicative resources in internet video conferencing. In Pemberton, L., & Shurville, S. (Eds.) Words on the Web: Computer Mediated Communication(pp. 44-62). Exeter, UK: Intellect Books.
Relieu, M. (2007). La téléprésence, ou l’autre visiophonie. Réseaux, 144, 183–224.
Sacks, H. (1984). Notes on methodology. In Atkinson, J. M., & Heritage, J. (eds.), Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis (pp. 21–27). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Sacks, H. (1992). Lectures on Conversation. Oxford: Blackwell.
Sacks, H., Schegloff, E. A., & Jefferson, G. (1974). A Simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation. Language, 50(4), 696–735.
Santos, G., & Harrell, S. (2017). Transforming Patriarchy: Chinese Families in the Twenty-First Century. Seattle, WA: University of Washington Press.
Schegloff, E. A. (1986). The routine as achievement. Human Studies, 9(2), 111-151.
Searles, D. K. (2018a). Building Family: The Interactional Practices of Families with Young Children. New Jersey, USA: Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey [PhD Thesis].
Searles, D. K. (2018b). ‘Look it Daddy’: Shows in family Facetime calls. Research on Children and Social Interaction, 2(1), 98–119.
Stivers, T. (2019). How We Manage Social Relationships Through Answers to Questions: The Case of Interjections. Discourse Processes, 56(3), 191–209.
Stivers, T., & Sidnell, J. (2005). Introduction: Multimodal interaction. Semiotica, 156, 1–20.
Sunakawa, C. (2012). Virtual “Ie” Household: Transnational Family Interactions in Japan and the United States. The University of Texas at Austin [PhD Thesis].
Wiggins, S. (2002). Talking with your mouth full: Gustatory mmms and the embodiment of pleasure. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 35(3), 311-336.
Wootton, A. J. (1981). Two request forms of four year olds. Journal of Pragmatics, 5(6), 511–523.
Ye, J. (2011). Left-behind children: The social price of China’s economic boom. The Journal of Peasant Studies, 38(3), 613–650.
Ye, J., & Pan, L. (2011). Differentiated childhoods: Impacts of rural labor migration on left-behind children in China. The Journal of Peasant Studies, 38(2), 355–377.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2021 Author and Journal
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
We follow the Budapest Open Access Initiative's definition of Open Access.
The journal allows the author(s) to hold the copyright without restrictions.
The journal allows software/spiders to automatically crawl the journal content (also known as text mining)
The journal provides article level metadata to DOAJ
The journal allows readers to read, download, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of its articles and allow readers to use them for any other lawful purpose.
