提高沟通的风险:GSA框架预测的增加手势产生的证据

S. Kelly, K. Byrne, J. Holler
{"title":"提高沟通的风险:GSA框架预测的增加手势产生的证据","authors":"S. Kelly, K. Byrne, J. Holler","doi":"10.3390/INFO2040579","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Theorists of language have argued that co-speech hand gestures are an intentional part of social communication. The present study provides evidence for these claims by showing that speakers adjust their gesture use according to their perceived relevance to the audience. Participants were asked to read about items that were and were not useful in a wilderness survival scenario, under the pretense that they would then explain (on camera) what they learned to one of two different audiences. For one audience (a group of college students in a dormitory orientation activity), the stakes of successful communication were low; for the other audience (a group of students preparing for a rugged camping trip in the mountains), the stakes were high. In their explanations to the camera, participants in the high stakes condition produced three times as many representational gestures, and spent three times as much time gesturing, than participants in the low stakes condition. This study extends previous research by showing that the anticipated consequences of one’s communication—namely, the degree to which information may be useful to an intended recipient—influences speakers’ use of gesture.","PeriodicalId":50362,"journal":{"name":"Information-An International Interdisciplinary Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2011-10-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"21","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Raising the stakes of communication: Evidence for increased gesture production as predicted by the GSA framework\",\"authors\":\"S. Kelly, K. Byrne, J. Holler\",\"doi\":\"10.3390/INFO2040579\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Theorists of language have argued that co-speech hand gestures are an intentional part of social communication. The present study provides evidence for these claims by showing that speakers adjust their gesture use according to their perceived relevance to the audience. Participants were asked to read about items that were and were not useful in a wilderness survival scenario, under the pretense that they would then explain (on camera) what they learned to one of two different audiences. For one audience (a group of college students in a dormitory orientation activity), the stakes of successful communication were low; for the other audience (a group of students preparing for a rugged camping trip in the mountains), the stakes were high. In their explanations to the camera, participants in the high stakes condition produced three times as many representational gestures, and spent three times as much time gesturing, than participants in the low stakes condition. This study extends previous research by showing that the anticipated consequences of one’s communication—namely, the degree to which information may be useful to an intended recipient—influences speakers’ use of gesture.\",\"PeriodicalId\":50362,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Information-An International Interdisciplinary Journal\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2011-10-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"21\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Information-An International Interdisciplinary Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3390/INFO2040579\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Information-An International Interdisciplinary Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/INFO2040579","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 21

摘要

语言理论家认为,共同说话的手势是社会交流的一个有意识的部分。目前的研究为这些说法提供了证据,表明说话者会根据他们感知到的与听众的相关性来调整他们的手势使用。参与者被要求阅读在野外生存场景中有用和无用的物品,然后假装他们会(在镜头前)向两种不同的观众之一解释他们所学到的东西。对于一个听众(一群参加宿舍迎新活动的大学生)来说,成功沟通的风险很低;对于另一群观众(一群准备在山区进行崎岖露营之旅的学生)来说,风险很高。在对着镜头解释时,高风险组的参与者比低风险组的参与者多做了三倍的代表性手势,花了三倍的时间做手势。这项研究扩展了先前的研究,表明一个人的交流的预期结果——即信息对目标接收者有用的程度——会影响说话人对手势的使用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Raising the stakes of communication: Evidence for increased gesture production as predicted by the GSA framework
Theorists of language have argued that co-speech hand gestures are an intentional part of social communication. The present study provides evidence for these claims by showing that speakers adjust their gesture use according to their perceived relevance to the audience. Participants were asked to read about items that were and were not useful in a wilderness survival scenario, under the pretense that they would then explain (on camera) what they learned to one of two different audiences. For one audience (a group of college students in a dormitory orientation activity), the stakes of successful communication were low; for the other audience (a group of students preparing for a rugged camping trip in the mountains), the stakes were high. In their explanations to the camera, participants in the high stakes condition produced three times as many representational gestures, and spent three times as much time gesturing, than participants in the low stakes condition. This study extends previous research by showing that the anticipated consequences of one’s communication—namely, the degree to which information may be useful to an intended recipient—influences speakers’ use of gesture.
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
8.3 months
×
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