A Comparison between Children's and Adults' Ability to Detect Conceptual Information Conveyed through Representational Gestures

Kelly, Spencer D.; Church, R. Breckinridge

doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.1998.tb06135.x

Cited by 118 publications

(88 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Over bilateral temporal sites, ERPs to the gesture mismatches were crucially more negative than ERPs to the matches (but not to the other conditions). Gesture mismatches differed from ERPs to the complementary and the no-gesture conditions in particular over the right hemisphere (Kelly et al, 2004; see also Wu & Coulson, 2005 for relevant results, Kelly, Creigh, & Bartolotti, 2009 on the automaticity of such integration and Kelly & Breckinridge Church, 1998 on developmental differences).…”

Section: Visually Situated Language Comprehension: Evidence From Erpsmentioning

confidence: 96%

Language comprehension in rich non-linguistic contexts: combining eye-tracking and event-related brain potentials

Knoeferle

2015

Cognitive Neuroscience of Natural Language Use

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The present chapter reviews the literature on visually situated language comprehension against the background that most theories of real-time sentence comprehension have ignored rich non-linguistic contexts. However, listeners' eye movements to objects during spoken language comprehension, as well as their eventrelated brain potentials (ERPs) have revealed that non-linguistic cues play an important role for real-time comprehension. In fact, referential processes are rapid and central in visually situated spoken language comprehension and even abstract words are rapidly grounded in objects through semantic associations. Similar ERP responses for non-linguistic and linguistic effects on comprehension suggest these two information sources are on a par in informing language comprehension. ERPs further revealed that non-linguistic cues affect lexical-semantic as well as compositional processes, thus further cementing the role of rich non-linguistic context in language comprehension. However, there is also considerable ambiguity in the linking between comprehension processes and each of these two measures (eye movements and ERPs). Combining eye-tracking and event-related brain potentials would improve the interpretation of individual measures and thus insights into visually-situated language comprehension.Knoeferle, P. (to appear). Language comprehension in rich non-linguistic contexts: combining eye tracking and event-related brain potentials. In: Roel, Williams (Ed.). Towards a cognitive neuroscience of natural language use. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

show abstract

Section: Visually Situated Language Comprehension: Evidence From Erpsmentioning

confidence: 96%

Language comprehension in rich non-linguistic contexts: combining eye-tracking and event-related brain potentials

Knoeferle

2015

Cognitive Neuroscience of Natural Language Use

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Some studies have been shown that adults and children can pick up information conveyed solely in a gesture (e.g. Broaders & Goldin-Meadow, 2010;Goldin-Meadow & Sandhofer, 1999;Goodrich & Hudson-Kam, 2009;Kelly & Church, 1998;Namy, Cambell, & Tomasello, 2004;Tomasello, Striano, & Rochat, 1999). Furthermore, gestures facilitate children's comprehension of semantically co-expressive words (McNeill, Alibali, & Evans, 2000;Morford & Goldin-Meadow, 1992).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Development of multimodal discourse comprehension: cohesive use of space by gestures

Sekiné

Kita

2015

Language, Cognition and Neuroscience

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…analysis developed by Kelly and Church [45,46]. We prepared a coding manual that could be used to score the information in participants' free-text descriptions against the information in the original clip.…”

Section: Analysis 271 Identification Of Spoken and Gestural Informmentioning

confidence: 99%

I see how you feel: Recipients obtain additional information from speakers’ gestures about pain

Rowbotham

Holler

Wearden

et al. 2016

Patient Education and Counseling

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: Despite the need for effective pain communication, pain is difficult to verbalise. Cospeech gestures frequently add information about pain that is not contained in the accompanying speech. We explored whether recipients can obtain additional information from gestures about the pain that is being described.Methods: Participants (n = 135) viewed clips of pain descriptions under one of four conditions: 1) Speech Only; 2) Speech and Gesture; 3) Speech, Gesture and Face; and 4) Speech, Gesture and Face plus Instruction (short presentation explaining the pain information that gestures can depict). Participants provided free-text descriptions of the pain that had been described.Responses were scored for the amount of information obtained from the original clips. Conclusions: Gestures produced during pain descriptions provide additional information about pain that recipients are able to pick up without detriment to their uptake of spoken information.Practice implications: Healthcare professionals may benefit from instruction in gestures to enhance uptake of information about patients' pain experiences.

show abstract

A Comparison between Children's and Adults' Ability to Detect Conceptual Information Conveyed through Representational Gestures

Cited by 118 publications

References 26 publications

Language comprehension in rich non-linguistic contexts: combining eye-tracking and event-related brain potentials

Language comprehension in rich non-linguistic contexts: combining eye-tracking and event-related brain potentials

Development of multimodal discourse comprehension: cohesive use of space by gestures

I see how you feel: Recipients obtain additional information from speakers’ gestures about pain

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About