Table 1 Interaction Analysis Model Phase... | Emerald Publishing

Table 1

Interaction Analysis Model

Phase	Identity	Description
1	Sharing/comparing of information	A statement of observation or opinion A statement of agreement from one or more other participants Corroborating examples provided by one or more participants Asking and answering questions to clarify details of statements Definition, description, or identification of a problem
2	Discovery and exploration of dissonance or inconsistency among ideas, concepts or statements	Identifying and stating areas of disagreement Asking and answering questions to clarify the source and extent of disagreement Restating the participant's position, and possible advancing of arguments experience, literature, formal data collected, or proposal of relevant metaphor or analogy to illustrate point of view
3	Negotiation of meaning/coconstruction of knowledge	Negotiation or clarification of the meaning of terms Negotiation of the relative weight to be assigned to types of argument Identification of areas of agreement of overlap among conflicting concepts Proposal and negotiation of new statements embodying compromise, coconstruction Proposal of integrating or accommodating metaphors or analogies
4	Testing and modification of proposed synthesis or construction	Testing the proposed synthesis against “received fact” as shared by the participations and/or their culture Testing against existing cognitive schema Testing against personal experience Testing against formal data collected Testing against contradictory testimony in the literature
5	Agreement statement(s)/applications of newly constructed meaning	Summarization of agreement(s) Applications of new knowledge Metacognitive statements by the participants illustrating their understanding that their knowledge or ways of thinking (cognitive schema) have changed as a result of the conference interaction

Phase	Identity	Description
1	Sharing/comparing of information	A statement of observation or opinion A statement of agreement from one or more other participants Corroborating examples provided by one or more participants Asking and answering questions to clarify details of statements Definition, description, or identification of a problem
2	Discovery and exploration of dissonance or inconsistency among ideas, concepts or statements	Identifying and stating areas of disagreement Asking and answering questions to clarify the source and extent of disagreement Restating the participant's position, and possible advancing of arguments experience, literature, formal data collected, or proposal of relevant metaphor or analogy to illustrate point of view
3	Negotiation of meaning/coconstruction of knowledge	Negotiation or clarification of the meaning of terms Negotiation of the relative weight to be assigned to types of argument Identification of areas of agreement of overlap among conflicting concepts Proposal and negotiation of new statements embodying compromise, coconstruction Proposal of integrating or accommodating metaphors or analogies
4	Testing and modification of proposed synthesis or construction	Testing the proposed synthesis against “received fact” as shared by the participations and/or their culture Testing against existing cognitive schema Testing against personal experience Testing against formal data collected Testing against contradictory testimony in the literature
5	Agreement statement(s)/applications of newly constructed meaning	Summarization of agreement(s) Applications of new knowledge Metacognitive statements by the participants illustrating their understanding that their knowledge or ways of thinking (cognitive schema) have changed as a result of the conference interaction

Source: Summary of the interaction analysis model adapted from Gunawardena et al. (1997) and Luebeck and Bice (2005).