Towards Measuring the Cognitive Loads of Different Dialog Acts through Dependency Distance

Dang Qi, Haitao Liu
{"title":"Towards Measuring the Cognitive Loads of Different Dialog Acts through Dependency Distance","authors":"Dang Qi, Haitao Liu","doi":"10.1145/3582768.3582775","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Although relevance theory has called attention to the analysis of cognitive aspects of pragmatic phenomena, few investigations have explored whether distinct dialog acts (DAs) require different degrees of cognitive loads, not to mention examining them with objective indices. The current paper then adopted a syntactic cognitive index – dependency distance – to analyze whether distinct categories of DAs differ in cognitive loads. Specifically, this paper adopted mean dependency distance (MDD), mean hierarchical distance (MHD), and normalized dependency distance (NDD) to examine the language data in the Switchboard Dialog Act Corpus (SwDA). The results showed that MDD, MHD and NDD are all effective in differentiating four genres of DAs – Information Request (IR), Agreement (Ag), Understanding (Un), and Answering (An), among which IR has the highest values of the three indicators, Un has the lowest, and Ag and An are somewhere in between. A follow-up ANOVA further corroborated that the forward DA (IR) significantly differed from the backward ones (Ag, Un, and An). With these results obtained, this paper may shed light on the relationship between DAs and cognitive resources, providing a new perspective for the research under the paradigm of pragmatics.","PeriodicalId":315721,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the 2022 6th International Conference on Natural Language Processing and Information Retrieval","volume":"68 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of the 2022 6th International Conference on Natural Language Processing and Information Retrieval","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/3582768.3582775","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Although relevance theory has called attention to the analysis of cognitive aspects of pragmatic phenomena, few investigations have explored whether distinct dialog acts (DAs) require different degrees of cognitive loads, not to mention examining them with objective indices. The current paper then adopted a syntactic cognitive index – dependency distance – to analyze whether distinct categories of DAs differ in cognitive loads. Specifically, this paper adopted mean dependency distance (MDD), mean hierarchical distance (MHD), and normalized dependency distance (NDD) to examine the language data in the Switchboard Dialog Act Corpus (SwDA). The results showed that MDD, MHD and NDD are all effective in differentiating four genres of DAs – Information Request (IR), Agreement (Ag), Understanding (Un), and Answering (An), among which IR has the highest values of the three indicators, Un has the lowest, and Ag and An are somewhere in between. A follow-up ANOVA further corroborated that the forward DA (IR) significantly differed from the backward ones (Ag, Un, and An). With these results obtained, this paper may shed light on the relationship between DAs and cognitive resources, providing a new perspective for the research under the paradigm of pragmatics.
依赖距离对不同对话行为认知负荷的测量
虽然关联理论已经引起人们对语用现象认知方面的关注,但很少有研究探讨不同的对话行为是否需要不同程度的认知负荷,更不用说用客观指标来检验它们了。本文采用句法认知指标——依赖距离来分析不同类别的译语在认知负荷上是否存在差异。具体而言,本文采用平均依赖距离(MDD)、平均分层距离(MHD)和规范化依赖距离(NDD)对总机对话行为语料库(SwDA)中的语言数据进行检验。结果表明,MDD、MHD和NDD均能有效区分信息请求(IR)、协议(Ag)、理解(Un)和回答(An)四种类型的信息需求,其中IR的值最高,Un的值最低,Ag和An介于两者之间。后续方差分析进一步证实,前向DA (IR)与后向DA (Ag, Un和An)显著不同。本文的研究结果有助于揭示语用分析与认知资源的关系,为语用学范式下的语用研究提供新的视角。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信