{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.025252525252525252, 'fraction_numerical': 0.006734006734006734, 'mean_word_length': 4.743961352657005, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Intra- or Interaction

The four very disparate papers presented here include a study of group communication process among college students, a developmental analysis of social interaction, an analysis of environmental impacts on interaction, and a methodological discussion of ways of studying interaction. Interaction, as in the title of this Symposium, is the shared topic, and some methods-particularly Bales’s (1950; 1970) approach to the coding of interaction data-are partially shared. Beyond these matters, it is hard to find common themes. One could, of course, discuss the papers one by one and bypass the problems of an attempt at integration. To forego this easier route it is necessary to turn to a commonality in submerged issues-in those issues which lie under the surface, too big to be tackled in a single paper. These are the nightmare issues that put to question our assumptions about the research we do and about its relevance to our real lives with others. Whether they are solely my own preoccupations, projected onto these papers, I leave to the authors. Human interaction is an exciting field. It is also a dangerously mind-boggling one. For a number of years I have