What makes a movement a gesture?

Abstract

Theories of how adults interpret the actions of others have focused on the goals and intentions of actors engaged in object-directed actions. Recent research has challenged this assumption, and shown that movements are often interpreted as being for their own sake (Schachner & Carey, 2013). Here we postulate a third interpretation of movement—movement that represents action, but does not literally act on objects in the world. These movements are gestures. In this paper, we describe a framework for predicting when movements are likely to be seen as representations. In Study 1, adults described one of three scenes: (1) an actor moving objects, (2) an actor moving her hands in the presence of objects (but not touching them) or (3) an actor moving her hands in the absence of objects. Participants systematically described the movements as depicting an object-directed action when the actor moved objects, and favored describing the movements as depicting movement for its own sake when the actor produced the same movements in the absence of objects. However, participants favored describing the movements as representations when the actor produced the movements near, but not on, the objects. Study 2 explored two additional features—the form of an actor’s hands and the presence of speech-like sounds—to test the effect of context on observers’ classification of movement as representational. When movements are seen as representations, they have the power to influence communication, learning, and cognition in ways that movement for its own sake does not. By incorporating representational gesture into our framework for movement analysis, we take an important step towards developing a more cohesive understanding of action-interpretation.

Learning from gesture: How early does it happen?

“…We suggest that there is a third category of movement--movement that is intended to represent goal-directed action--in other words, gesture. When a movement is produced in the presence of objects, but does not involve touching or moving the objects (e.g., a hand makes an arc motion from a ball to a box), adults tend to interpret that movement as a representation of goal-directed action (in this case, how the ball should be moved to the box) (Novack, Wakefield & Goldin-Meadow, 2015). …”

Representing and enacting movement: The body as an instructional resource in a simulator-based environment

“…The answer to these questions is in Hutchins' view one of engaging in specific culturally shaped perceptual processes of action, a sort of high-level cognitive processes that require meaning from movement. The view is supported by recent work that has been measuring to what extent contextual cues can make a movement into a gesture, and a gesture appear more meaningful, and subsequently can encourage onlookers to give representational responses for bodily actions (Novak et al 2016). The results from Novak et al (2016) revealed the impact of external cues to the interpretation of bodily action, where the meaning can be enacted from the environment within which the embodied action occurred.…”

“…The view is supported by recent work that has been measuring to what extent contextual cues can make a movement into a gesture, and a gesture appear more meaningful, and subsequently can encourage onlookers to give representational responses for bodily actions (Novak et al 2016). The results from Novak et al (2016) revealed the impact of external cues to the interpretation of bodily action, where the meaning can be enacted from the environment within which the embodied action occurred. They also suggested that the onlooker's prior knowledge of a particular object might affect the ability to use the particular object to interpret a movement as representational as well as cues that indicate that the embodied action is part of a communicative act (e.g., the specific content of the speech, facial expressions and eye-gaze).…”

“…They also suggested that the onlooker's prior knowledge of a particular object might affect the ability to use the particular object to interpret a movement as representational as well as cues that indicate that the embodied action is part of a communicative act (e.g., the specific content of the speech, facial expressions and eye-gaze). To conclude, Novak et al (2016) revealed that the richer the context, the more likely an embodied action will be interpreted as meaningful, and thus as representational, rather than as a movement for the sake of movement. In other world, it is the context in which a movement is embedded that makes the movement a gesture that has representational properties of being an enactment.…”

“…These moments of entrainment in instruction can be explained as adding a layer of functionality in the simulator where functionality is missing, even if that layer is imagined, using the body to fill the missing information from the simulator environment. When movements are viewed as representations or enactments in gesture, Novak et al (2016) are arguing that these representational actions have an impact on communication, learning, and cognition in significant ways. Their results show that when interpreting another individual's movements, onlookers can attend to contextual cues arising from a variety of sources.…”