Measuring the Dynamics of Interactional Synchrony

Schmidt, R. C.; Morr, Samantha; Fitzpatrick, Paula; Richardson, Michael J.

doi:10.1007/s10919-012-0138-5

Cited by 99 publications

(135 citation statements)

References 45 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

122

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The saliency of behavioral matching in firsthand experience has an analog in the scientific study of interpersonal coordination. Synchronization is a salient form of coordination dynamics, and one that is relatively easy to formalize and investigate mathematically (Schmidt, Morr, Fitzpatrick, Richardson, 2012). Other phase relations-like anti phase (Haken, Kelso, & Bunz, 1985;Keller & Repp, 2004)-are also investigated in this area, but both phase relations can be conceptualized as different types o f behavioral matching.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Complexity matching in dyadic conversation.

Abney¹,

Paxton²,

Dale³

et al. 2014

Journal of Experimental Psychology: General

156

201

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recent studies of dyadic interaction have examined phenomena of synchronization, entrainment, alignment, and convergence. All these forms of behavioral matching have been hypothesized to play a supportive role in establishing coordination and common ground between interlocutors. In the present study, evidence is found for a new kind of coordination termed complexity matching. Temporal dynamics in conversational speech signals were analyzed through time series of acoustic onset events. Timing in periods of acoustic energy was found to exhibit behavioral matching that reflects complementary timing in turn-taking. In addition, acoustic onset times were found to exhibit power law clustering across a range of timescales, and these power law functions were found to exhibit complexity matching that is distinct from behavioral matching. Complexity matching is discussed in terms of interactive alignment and other theoretical principles that lead to new hypotheses about information exchange in dyadic conversation and interaction in general.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Complexity matching in dyadic conversation.

Abney¹,

Paxton²,

Dale³

et al. 2014

Journal of Experimental Psychology: General

156

201

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Conversation analysis and discourse psychology have now been coupled with sophisticated computational and behavioral methods such as natural language processing and computational linguistics (Graesser, Swamer, & Hu, 1997), eye-tracking (Tanenhaus, Spivey-Knowlton, Eberhard, & Sedivy, 1995), automated body movement (Paxton & Dale, in press;Schmidt, Morr, Fitzpatrick, & Richardson, 2012) and acoustic analysis (Oller et al, 2010;Wyatt, Bilmes, Choudhury, & Kitts, 2008), dynamical systems methods (Riley & Van Orden, 2005;Shockley, Santana, & Fowler, 2003), and more. Language is a complex and multidimensional activity, and our understanding of it-how it evolved, is learned, and is used-must come from integrating such sophisticated methods in naturalistic circumstances, not only from abstract assumptions about linguistic structure that rarely manifest themselves except in preempirical intuitions.…”

Section: -Plm59c-9780124071872mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Self-Organization of Human Interaction

Dale

Fusaroli

Duran

et al. 2013

Psychology of Learning and Motivation

190

177

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Although interpersonal coordination may emerge spontaneously as a function of universal dynamic principles (Schmidt, Morr, Fitzpatrick, & Richardson, 2012;Marsh, Richardson, & Schmidt, 2009), successful interaction often depends on peopleʼs ability to intentionally coordinate their actions in space and time to reach a common goal. To lift a heavy object together, to perform a handshake, or to clink glasses, it is helpful and sometimes necessary for co-actors to form an action plan, which may include the representation of their own task as well as the representation of the tasks of others who are involved in the interaction Knoblich, Butterfill, & Sebanz, 2011).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Attention Allocation and Task Representation during Joint Action Planning

Kourtis

Knoblich²,

Woźniak

et al. 2014

Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract■ We investigated whether people take into account an interaction partnerʼs attentional focus and whether they represent in advance their partnerʼs part of the task when planning to engage in a synchronous joint action. The experiment involved two participants planning and performing joint actions (i.e., synchronously lifting and clinking glasses), unimanual individual actions (i.e., lifting and moving a glass as if clinking with another person), and bimanual individual actions. EEG was recorded from one of the participants. We employed a choice reaction paradigm where a visual cue indicated the type of action to be planned, followed 1.5 sec later by a visual go stimulus, prompting the participants to act. We studied attention allocation processes by examining two lateralized EEG components, namely the anterior directing attention negativity and the late directing attention positivity. Action planning processes were examined using the late contingent negative variation and the movement-related potential. The results show that early stages of joint action planning involve dividing attention between locations in space relevant for oneʼs own part of the joint action and locations relevant for oneʼs partnerʼs part of the joint action. At later stages of joint action planning, participants represented in advance their partnerʼs upcoming action in addition to their own action, although not at an effector-specific level. Our study provides electrophysiological evidence supporting the operation of attention sharing processes and predictive self/other action representation during the planning phase of a synchronous joint task. ■

show abstract

Measuring the Dynamics of Interactional Synchrony

Cited by 99 publications

References 45 publications

Complexity matching in dyadic conversation.

Complexity matching in dyadic conversation.

The Self-Organization of Human Interaction

Attention Allocation and Task Representation during Joint Action Planning

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About