Giving and receiving advice in computer-mediated peer response activities

Oct 15, 2026

Uploaded by Fans

Synchronous computer-mediated peer response remains underexplored at the micro level, particularly how participants design and interpret advice. Applying conversation analysis, the study examines how advice givers and recipients handle asymmetrical roles in an ESL university writing classroom. Through three dyadic cases, it identifies interactional ambiguity when novice advice givers try to balance critique with interpersonal harmony, often using compliments rather than direct advice. The findings connect institutional positions with social relationships during advising episodes.

LanguageEnglish

CategoryResearch & Report

FormatPDF

Pages31

Reading Time1 h 18 min

AccessFree to download

Abstract

Introduction

Theoretical framework

The use of Synchronous Computer Mediated Communication (SCMC) for L2 peer interactions

calico (online) issn 2056–9017 Article Giving and receiving advice in computer-mediated peer response activities Mei-Hsing Tsai and Celeste Kinginger Abstract In synchronous computer-mediated contexts, peer-to-peer interaction at the microlevel has received little scrutiny.1 In applying a conversation analysis approach, this study scrutinizes the precise nature of peer-to-peer advice giving and receiving. In this process, an advice giver can be viewed at certain moments as more competent to evaluate a recipient’s essay and to provide advice, while the recipient can be positioned as being less knowledgeable. Therefore, the present study focuses on the following research question: How did advice givers and recipients manage the asymmetrical participant roles inherent in L2 peer response? More specifically, this study explores the relationship between institutional roles and social relationships during advising episodes by investigating three single cases of dyadic pairs in an ESL university writing classroom. We show the ambiguity arising in interactions as novice advice givers attempt to balance criticism with the maintenance of harmonious interpersonal relationships, offering compliments rather than straightforward advice. Keywords: advice and suggestions; conversation analysis; L2 peer response; politeness strategies; text-based computer-mediated communication Affiliation National Tsing Hua University, Taiwan. email: meiht1[12@gmail.com](12@gmail.com) (corresponding author) calico vol 32.1 2015 82–112 ©2014, equinox publishing doi : 10. 1558/calico.v32i1 .25959 Mei-Hsing Tsai and Celeste Kinginger 83 Introduction The current study explores a particular aspect of L2 peer review – advice giving and receiving – as it takes place during computer-mediated interaction in an ESL classroom. Unlike other dyads in educational contexts where institutional relationships are relatively clear-cut (e.g., professor-student or tutor-tutee), the institutional roles of advice givers and recipients in L2 peer review activities are relatively fluid. Peer response is a reciprocal activity where each participant takes turns as an advice giver and recipient while, at the same time, maintaining social solidarity with peers. However, peer review activity can offer asymmetrical participant roles. Hutchby (1995) pointed out a distinctive and fundamental characteristic of advice-giving because an advice giver may presuppose ‘some deficit in the knowledge state of recipient, advice-giving is an activity which assumes or establishes an asymmetry between participants’ (p. 221). In other words, during advice giving episodes, the advice giver can be momentarily construed as more knowledgeable than his or her peer, providing critique, suggestions or directives, while the recipient can be positioned as less competent (Hutchby, 1995). 2 In L2 peer review activities, the role of advice giver offers the participant greater institutional power to make evaluative assessment and provide advice at the moment of interaction. These relatively asymmetrical roles may cause peer review interactions to become what Brown and Levinson (1987) termed face-threatening acts (FTAs), threatening participants’ negative face (the right to non-imposition) and positive face (the need to have a positive self-image) . L2 speakers may employ different interactive strategies to mitigate FTAs and to maintain or establish social solidarity in peer review sessions. Employing conversation analysis, we explore the specific features of advice giving and receiving in the SCMC setting, while also showing how peer responders balance institutional roles and maintenance of interpersonal relationships. L2 peer review activities in this study are considered institutional practices;3 that is, ‘participants’ institutional or professional identities are somehow made relevant to the work activities in which they are engaged’ (Drew and Heritage, 1992: 3) . L2 peer response

FAQs

What research question does the study focus on?

How advice givers and recipients manage asymmetrical participant roles in L2 peer response. It also examines how institutional roles relate to social relationships during advising episodes.

What method is used to analyze advice interactions?

The study applies a conversation analysis approach to scrutinize the precise nature of peer-to-peer advice giving and receiving in synchronous computer-mediated contexts.

What does the study find about novice advice givers?

Novice advice givers face ambiguity in interactions as they attempt to balance criticism with maintaining harmonious interpersonal relationships, often offering compliments rather than straightforward advice.

Oct 15, 2026

Uploaded by Fans