Cargando…
Next Speakers Plan Their Turn Early and Speak after Turn-Final “Go-Signals”
In conversation, turn-taking is usually fluid, with next speakers taking their turn right after the end of the previous turn. Most, but not all, previous studies show that next speakers start to plan their turn early, if possible already during the incoming turn. The present study makes use of the l...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Frontiers Media S.A.
2017
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5387091/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28443035 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00393 |
_version_ | 1782520876677201920 |
---|---|
author | Barthel, Mathias Meyer, Antje S. Levinson, Stephen C. |
author_facet | Barthel, Mathias Meyer, Antje S. Levinson, Stephen C. |
author_sort | Barthel, Mathias |
collection | PubMed |
description | In conversation, turn-taking is usually fluid, with next speakers taking their turn right after the end of the previous turn. Most, but not all, previous studies show that next speakers start to plan their turn early, if possible already during the incoming turn. The present study makes use of the list-completion paradigm (Barthel et al., 2016), analyzing speech onset latencies and eye-movements of participants in a task-oriented dialogue with a confederate. The measures are used to disentangle the contributions to the timing of turn-taking of early planning of content on the one hand and initiation of articulation as a reaction to the upcoming turn-end on the other hand. Participants named objects visible on their computer screen in response to utterances that did, or did not, contain lexical and prosodic cues to the end of the incoming turn. In the presence of an early lexical cue, participants showed earlier gaze shifts toward the target objects and responded faster than in its absence, whereas the presence of a late intonational cue only led to faster response times and did not affect the timing of participants' eye movements. The results show that with a combination of eye-movement and turn-transition time measures it is possible to tease apart the effects of early planning and response initiation on turn timing. They are consistent with models of turn-taking that assume that next speakers (a) start planning their response as soon as the incoming turn's message can be understood and (b) monitor the incoming turn for cues to turn-completion so as to initiate their response when turn-transition becomes relevant. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5387091 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2017 |
publisher | Frontiers Media S.A. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-53870912017-04-25 Next Speakers Plan Their Turn Early and Speak after Turn-Final “Go-Signals” Barthel, Mathias Meyer, Antje S. Levinson, Stephen C. Front Psychol Psychology In conversation, turn-taking is usually fluid, with next speakers taking their turn right after the end of the previous turn. Most, but not all, previous studies show that next speakers start to plan their turn early, if possible already during the incoming turn. The present study makes use of the list-completion paradigm (Barthel et al., 2016), analyzing speech onset latencies and eye-movements of participants in a task-oriented dialogue with a confederate. The measures are used to disentangle the contributions to the timing of turn-taking of early planning of content on the one hand and initiation of articulation as a reaction to the upcoming turn-end on the other hand. Participants named objects visible on their computer screen in response to utterances that did, or did not, contain lexical and prosodic cues to the end of the incoming turn. In the presence of an early lexical cue, participants showed earlier gaze shifts toward the target objects and responded faster than in its absence, whereas the presence of a late intonational cue only led to faster response times and did not affect the timing of participants' eye movements. The results show that with a combination of eye-movement and turn-transition time measures it is possible to tease apart the effects of early planning and response initiation on turn timing. They are consistent with models of turn-taking that assume that next speakers (a) start planning their response as soon as the incoming turn's message can be understood and (b) monitor the incoming turn for cues to turn-completion so as to initiate their response when turn-transition becomes relevant. Frontiers Media S.A. 2017-04-11 /pmc/articles/PMC5387091/ /pubmed/28443035 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00393 Text en Copyright © 2017 Barthel, Meyer and Levinson. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms. |
spellingShingle | Psychology Barthel, Mathias Meyer, Antje S. Levinson, Stephen C. Next Speakers Plan Their Turn Early and Speak after Turn-Final “Go-Signals” |
title | Next Speakers Plan Their Turn Early and Speak after Turn-Final “Go-Signals” |
title_full | Next Speakers Plan Their Turn Early and Speak after Turn-Final “Go-Signals” |
title_fullStr | Next Speakers Plan Their Turn Early and Speak after Turn-Final “Go-Signals” |
title_full_unstemmed | Next Speakers Plan Their Turn Early and Speak after Turn-Final “Go-Signals” |
title_short | Next Speakers Plan Their Turn Early and Speak after Turn-Final “Go-Signals” |
title_sort | next speakers plan their turn early and speak after turn-final “go-signals” |
topic | Psychology |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5387091/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28443035 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00393 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT barthelmathias nextspeakersplantheirturnearlyandspeakafterturnfinalgosignals AT meyerantjes nextspeakersplantheirturnearlyandspeakafterturnfinalgosignals AT levinsonstephenc nextspeakersplantheirturnearlyandspeakafterturnfinalgosignals |