Communicating Through Acting: Affording Communicative Intention in Pantomimes

IF 2.4 2区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL
Siyi Gong, Kaiwen Jiang, Jessica G. Li, Mireille Karadanaian, Ziyi Meng, Tao Gao
{"title":"Communicating Through Acting: Affording Communicative Intention in Pantomimes","authors":"Siyi Gong,&nbsp;Kaiwen Jiang,&nbsp;Jessica G. Li,&nbsp;Mireille Karadanaian,&nbsp;Ziyi Meng,&nbsp;Tao Gao","doi":"10.1111/cogs.70120","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>How do people intuitively recognize communicative intention in pantomimes, even though such actions kinematically resemble instrumental behaviors directed at changing the world? We focus on two alternative hypotheses: one posits that instrumental intention competes with communicative intention, such that the weaker the former, the stronger the latter; the other suggests that instrumental intention is nested within communicative intention, such that the presence of the former facilitates the latter. To test these hypotheses, we compiled a video dataset of action-object pairs with varying frequencies in the English corpus. Using the concept of affordance, we qualitatively varied the degree to which a scene visually supports the execution of an action. Across two empirical experiments, we found a nonmonotonic relationship between affordance and communicative ratings: partial affordance, where the scene provides some support for an action's instrumental purpose, elicited the strongest perception of communicative intention. In contrast, full affordance or no affordance resulted in weaker interpretations of communicative intention. We also found that recognizing the instrumental components of pantomime-like actions predicted a higher communicativeness rating. Our study, on top of confirming humans' ability to interpret novel pantomimes, reveals a novel mechanism of communicative intention: recognizing an instrumental goal and perceiving suboptimal conditions for achieving it together enhance the communicative signal. This work contributes toward an integrated theory of pantomimes, demonstrating how the rationality principle not only aids in distinguishing communicative intention but also supports the identification of instrumental content embedded within it.</p>","PeriodicalId":48349,"journal":{"name":"Cognitive Science","volume":"49 10","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cognitive Science","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/cogs.70120","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

How do people intuitively recognize communicative intention in pantomimes, even though such actions kinematically resemble instrumental behaviors directed at changing the world? We focus on two alternative hypotheses: one posits that instrumental intention competes with communicative intention, such that the weaker the former, the stronger the latter; the other suggests that instrumental intention is nested within communicative intention, such that the presence of the former facilitates the latter. To test these hypotheses, we compiled a video dataset of action-object pairs with varying frequencies in the English corpus. Using the concept of affordance, we qualitatively varied the degree to which a scene visually supports the execution of an action. Across two empirical experiments, we found a nonmonotonic relationship between affordance and communicative ratings: partial affordance, where the scene provides some support for an action's instrumental purpose, elicited the strongest perception of communicative intention. In contrast, full affordance or no affordance resulted in weaker interpretations of communicative intention. We also found that recognizing the instrumental components of pantomime-like actions predicted a higher communicativeness rating. Our study, on top of confirming humans' ability to interpret novel pantomimes, reveals a novel mechanism of communicative intention: recognizing an instrumental goal and perceiving suboptimal conditions for achieving it together enhance the communicative signal. This work contributes toward an integrated theory of pantomimes, demonstrating how the rationality principle not only aids in distinguishing communicative intention but also supports the identification of instrumental content embedded within it.

Abstract Image

通过表演进行交流:哑剧中的交流意图
人们如何直观地识别哑剧中的交际意图,即使这些行为在运动学上类似于旨在改变世界的工具性行为?我们关注两个可选的假设:一个假设工具意图与交际意图竞争,前者越弱,后者越强;另一种观点认为工具意图嵌套在交际意图中,因此前者的存在促进了后者。为了验证这些假设,我们编译了一个英语语料库中不同频率的动作-对象对的视频数据集。使用可视性的概念,我们定性地改变场景在视觉上支持动作执行的程度。在两项实证实验中,我们发现可视性与交际评分之间存在非单调关系:部分可视性,即场景为行为的工具性目的提供了一些支持,引发了最强烈的交际意图感知。相反,充分提供或不提供则导致对交际意图的解释较弱。我们还发现,认识到类似哑剧的动作的工具成分预示着更高的交流性评级。我们的研究在证实了人类对新哑剧的理解能力的基础上,揭示了一种新的交际意图机制:识别工具目标和感知实现该目标的次优条件共同增强了交际信号。这项工作有助于哑剧的综合理论,展示了合理性原则如何不仅有助于区分交际意图,而且还支持识别其中嵌入的工具性内容。
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
Cognitive Science
Cognitive Science PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL-
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
8.00%
发文量
139
期刊介绍: Cognitive Science publishes articles in all areas of cognitive science, covering such topics as knowledge representation, inference, memory processes, learning, problem solving, planning, perception, natural language understanding, connectionism, brain theory, motor control, intentional systems, and other areas of interdisciplinary concern. Highest priority is given to research reports that are specifically written for a multidisciplinary audience. The audience is primarily researchers in cognitive science and its associated fields, including anthropologists, education researchers, psychologists, philosophers, linguists, computer scientists, neuroscientists, and roboticists.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信