This contribution focuses on a physiotherapy consultation in which the first author of the contribution is the patient and the second author is the physiotherapist. It features analysis of video excerpts in which (1) the physiotherapist instructs the patient how to do an exercise and (2) the patient turns the physiotherapist's instructions into a course of action while (3) the physiotherapist monitors, assesses, guides, and corrects the patient's instructed actions by deploying touch. The investigation draws on video-recordings and transcriptions of (...) the physiotherapist’s and the patient’s interaction during the exercise instructions, the authors’ experience of touching/being touched during these instructions, and their shared understandings as discussed during data-sessions devoted to select video-clips of exercise instructions. In a learning process, the instructor’s instructional corrections are critical: they provide learners with relevant specifications and explanations as to how instructed actions and/or remedial actions are to be accomplished. Whereas monitoring and touching the patient allows the physiotherapist to feel, assess, correct, and guide the patient’s instructed actions, being touched permits the patient to feel how the physiotherapist’s touch resonates beyond locally circumscribed body contact and adapt her movements accordingly. Our contribution thus reveals touching/being touched configurations that establish joint attention and action on extended sensoriality as forming constitutive parts of a dynamic sensorimotor process of inter- and intrabodily resonance, which is challenging to investigate. (shrink)

Whereas “professional vision” has been mostly analyzed in apprenticeship and other settings where knowledge is made explicit or reflected upon, I focus on how expertise tacitly plays out in task-oriented interaction among practitioners. The paper considers orientation both to the coworker’s and one’s own expertise in the collaborative accomplishment of airport security work. I show how screeners recruit action from colleagues in largely underspecified ways, based on shared access to the visibility field and expected professional vision. Requesting is tacitly accomplished (...) via “highlighting,” which also accounts for one’s request. Accepting is silently achieved via locomotion, which also serves as a display of understanding. Embodied action is systematically preferred to verbal one. Talk is employed in larger proportions when the domain of scrutiny is not equally accessible to interactants, and when “face-work” is required. (shrink)