言语不流利和手势作为元认知线索

IF 2.4 2区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL
Begüm Yılmaz, Reyhan Furman, Tilbe Göksun, Terry Eskenazi
{"title":"言语不流利和手势作为元认知线索","authors":"Begüm Yılmaz,&nbsp;Reyhan Furman,&nbsp;Tilbe Göksun,&nbsp;Terry Eskenazi","doi":"10.1111/cogs.70093","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>How language interacts with metacognitive processes is an understudied area. Earlier research shows that people produce disfluencies (i.e., “<i>uh</i>” s or “<i>um</i>” s) in their speech when they are not sure of their answers, indicating metacognitive monitoring. Gestures have monitoring and predictive roles in language, also implicating metacognitive processes. Further, the rate of speech disfluencies and gestures change as a function of the communicational setting. People produce fewer disfluencies and more gestures when they can see the listener than when the listener is not visible. In the current study, 50 participants (32 women, <i>Mage</i> = 21.16, <i>SD</i> = 1.46) were asked 40 general knowledge questions, either with a visible (<i>n</i> = 25) or nonvisible (<i>n</i> = 25) listener. They provided feelings-of-knowing (FOK) judgment immediately after seeing the question and were asked to think aloud while pondering their answers. Then, they provided retrospective confidence judgments (RCJs). Results showed that gestures and speech disfluencies were not related either to the accuracy or the FOK judgments. However, both gestures and speech disfluencies predicted RCJs uniquely and interactively. Speech disfluencies negatively predicted RCJs. In contrast, hand gestures were positively related to RCJs. Importantly, the use of gestures was more strongly related to RCJs when disfluencies were also higher. No effect of communicational setting on the rate of gestures or speech disfluencies was found. These results highlight the importance of multimodal language cues in the elaboration of metacognitive judgments.</p>","PeriodicalId":48349,"journal":{"name":"Cognitive Science","volume":"49 8","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Speech Disfluencies and Hand Gestures as Metacognitive Cues\",\"authors\":\"Begüm Yılmaz,&nbsp;Reyhan Furman,&nbsp;Tilbe Göksun,&nbsp;Terry Eskenazi\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/cogs.70093\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>How language interacts with metacognitive processes is an understudied area. Earlier research shows that people produce disfluencies (i.e., “<i>uh</i>” s or “<i>um</i>” s) in their speech when they are not sure of their answers, indicating metacognitive monitoring. Gestures have monitoring and predictive roles in language, also implicating metacognitive processes. Further, the rate of speech disfluencies and gestures change as a function of the communicational setting. People produce fewer disfluencies and more gestures when they can see the listener than when the listener is not visible. In the current study, 50 participants (32 women, <i>Mage</i> = 21.16, <i>SD</i> = 1.46) were asked 40 general knowledge questions, either with a visible (<i>n</i> = 25) or nonvisible (<i>n</i> = 25) listener. They provided feelings-of-knowing (FOK) judgment immediately after seeing the question and were asked to think aloud while pondering their answers. Then, they provided retrospective confidence judgments (RCJs). Results showed that gestures and speech disfluencies were not related either to the accuracy or the FOK judgments. However, both gestures and speech disfluencies predicted RCJs uniquely and interactively. Speech disfluencies negatively predicted RCJs. In contrast, hand gestures were positively related to RCJs. Importantly, the use of gestures was more strongly related to RCJs when disfluencies were also higher. No effect of communicational setting on the rate of gestures or speech disfluencies was found. These results highlight the importance of multimodal language cues in the elaboration of metacognitive judgments.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48349,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Cognitive Science\",\"volume\":\"49 8\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-08-05\",\"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.70093\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cognitive Science","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/cogs.70093","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

摘要

语言如何与元认知过程相互作用是一个研究不足的领域。早期的研究表明,当人们不确定自己的答案时,他们会在讲话中产生不流畅(即“呃”或“嗯”),这表明他们存在元认知监控。手势在语言中具有监测和预测作用,也涉及元认知过程。此外,言语不流畅和手势的比率随着交际环境的变化而变化。当人们能看到听者时,会比看不见听者时产生更少的不流畅感和更多的手势。在目前的研究中,50名参与者(32名女性,Mage = 21.16, SD = 1.46)被问及40个一般性知识问题,有25名(n = 25)或25名(n = 25)听众。他们在看到问题后立即给出了“知道的感觉”(FOK)判断,并被要求在思考答案时大声思考。然后,他们提供回顾性信心判断(RCJs)。结果表明,手势和言语不流畅与FOK判断的准确性和准确性无关。然而,手势和言语不流畅都是预测rcj的独特和交互的因素。言语不流畅负向预测rcj。相反,手势与rcj呈正相关。重要的是,当不流畅度也较高时,手势的使用与rcj的关系更强。没有发现交流环境对手势或言语不流畅率的影响。这些结果强调了多模态语言线索在元认知判断过程中的重要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Speech Disfluencies and Hand Gestures as Metacognitive Cues

How language interacts with metacognitive processes is an understudied area. Earlier research shows that people produce disfluencies (i.e., “uh” s or “um” s) in their speech when they are not sure of their answers, indicating metacognitive monitoring. Gestures have monitoring and predictive roles in language, also implicating metacognitive processes. Further, the rate of speech disfluencies and gestures change as a function of the communicational setting. People produce fewer disfluencies and more gestures when they can see the listener than when the listener is not visible. In the current study, 50 participants (32 women, Mage = 21.16, SD = 1.46) were asked 40 general knowledge questions, either with a visible (n = 25) or nonvisible (n = 25) listener. They provided feelings-of-knowing (FOK) judgment immediately after seeing the question and were asked to think aloud while pondering their answers. Then, they provided retrospective confidence judgments (RCJs). Results showed that gestures and speech disfluencies were not related either to the accuracy or the FOK judgments. However, both gestures and speech disfluencies predicted RCJs uniquely and interactively. Speech disfluencies negatively predicted RCJs. In contrast, hand gestures were positively related to RCJs. Importantly, the use of gestures was more strongly related to RCJs when disfluencies were also higher. No effect of communicational setting on the rate of gestures or speech disfluencies was found. These results highlight the importance of multimodal language cues in the elaboration of metacognitive judgments.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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