Disfluency in dialogue: an intentional signal from the speaker?

Finlayson, Ian; Corley, Martin

doi:10.3758/s13423-012-0279-x

Cited by 34 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Fox Tree, 2001;Fox Tree & Schrock, 1999), but their assumed conversation-managing function (Clark & Fox Tree, 2002) remains controversial (e.g. Finlayson & Corley, 2012;Schegloff, 2010).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Anticipating predictability: an ERP investigation of expectation-managing discourse markers in dialogue comprehension

Rasenberg

Rommers

Bergen

2019

Language, Cognition and Neuroscience

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In two ERP experiments, we investigated how the Dutch discourse markers eigenlijk "actually", signalling expectation disconfirmation, and inderdaad "indeed", signalling expectation confirmation, affect incremental dialogue comprehension. We investigated their effects on the processing of subsequent (un)predictable words, and on the quality of word representations in memory. Participants read dialogues with (un)predictable endings that followed a discourse marker (eigenlijk in Experiment 1, inderdaad in Experiment 2) or a control adverb. We found no strong evidence that discourse markers modulated online predictability effects elicited by subsequently read words. However, words following eigenlijk elicited an enhanced posterior post-N400 positivity compared with words following an adverb regardless of their predictability, potentially reflecting increased processing costs associated with pragmatically driven discourse updating. No effects of inderdaad were found on online processing, but inderdaad seemed to influence memory for (un)predictable dialogue endings. These findings nuance our understanding of how pragmatic markers affect incremental language comprehension. ARTICLE HISTORY

show abstract

“…Fox Tree, 2001;Fox Tree & Schrock, 1999), but their assumed conversation-managing function (Clark & Fox Tree, 2002) remains controversial (e.g. Finlayson & Corley, 2012;Schegloff, 2010).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Anticipating predictability: an ERP investigation of expectation-managing discourse markers in dialogue comprehension

Rasenberg

Rommers

Bergen

2019

Language, Cognition and Neuroscience

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These conversation-like tasks usually use a constrained conversation in which participants interact with either a naïve participant or a confederate. These experiments allow researchers to focus on, for example, the turn-taking event (Finlayson & Corley, 2012; Stivers et al, 2009). the role of the dialogue partner (Branigan, Pickering, Pearson, McLean, & Nass, 2003).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

In dialogue with an avatar, language behavior is identical to dialogue with a human partner

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The use of virtual reality (VR) as a methodological tool is becoming increasingly popular in behavioral research as its flexibility allows for a wide range of applications. This new method has not been as widely accepted in the field of psycholinguistics, however, possibly due to the assumption that language processing during human-computer interactions does not accurately reflect human-human interactions. Yet at the same time there is a growing need to study human-human language interactions in a tightly controlled context, which has not been possible using existing methods. VR, however, offers experimental control over parameters that cannot be (as finely) controlled in the real world. As such, in this study we aim to show that human-computer language interaction is comparable to human-human language interaction in virtual reality. In the current study we compare participants’ language behavior in a syntactic priming task with human versus computer partners: we used a human partner, a human-like avatar with human-like facial expressions and verbal behavior, and a computer-like avatar which had this humanness removed. As predicted, our study shows comparable priming effects between the human and human-like avatar suggesting that participants attributed human-like agency to the human-like avatar. Indeed, when interacting with the computer-like avatar, the priming effect was significantly decreased. This suggests that when interacting with a human-like avatar, sentence processing is comparable to interacting with a human partner. Our study therefore shows that VR is a valid platform for conducting language research and studying dialogue interactions in an ecologically valid manner.

show abstract

“…Therefore, their conclusion was that filled pauses are not reliable cues to the presence of a delay. In another study, Finlayson and Corley (2010) investigated this issue in a study that compared disfluency production in dialogue and in monologue situations, with the hypothesis that if disfluencies are produced with communicative intent, they should occur more often in a dialogue than in a monologue. However, Finlayson and Corley found no difference in the rate of disfluency production when participants were speaking to a confederate, as compared with when they were not (see also Oviatt, 1995).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The role of inhibition in the production of disfluencies

et al. 2010

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Disfluency is a common occurrence in speech and is generally thought to be related to difficulty in the production system. One unexplored issue is the extent to which inhibition is required to prevent incorrect speech plans from being articulated. Therefore, we examined disfluency production in participants with attentiondeficit/ hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), which is linked to deficits in inhibitory function and response suppression (Nigg, 2001). Participants completed a sentence production task in which they were presented with two pictures and a verb and their task was to produce a sentence. If inhibition plays a role in preventing incorrect speech plans, we would expect ADHD participants to produce more repetition and repair disfluencies than would non-ADHD controls. The results showed that one subtype of ADHD (i.e., the combined) produced more repair disfluencies as task demands increased. We conclude that the production system relies on inhibitory control in order to prevent errors in language production.

show abstract

Disfluency in dialogue: an intentional signal from the speaker?

Cited by 34 publications

References 35 publications

Anticipating predictability: an ERP investigation of expectation-managing discourse markers in dialogue comprehension

Anticipating predictability: an ERP investigation of expectation-managing discourse markers in dialogue comprehension

In dialogue with an avatar, language behavior is identical to dialogue with a human partner

The role of inhibition in the production of disfluencies

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About