Co-Speech Gesture Mimicry in the Process of Collaborative Referring During Face-to-Face Dialogue

Abstract

Mimicry has been observed regarding a range of nonverbal behaviors, but only recently have researchers started to investigate mimicry in co-speech gestures. These gestures are considered to be crucially different from other aspects of nonverbal behavior due to their tight link with speech. This study provides evidence of mimicry in co-speech gestures in face-to-face dialogue, the most common forum of everyday talk. In addition, it offers an analysis of the functions that mimicked co-speech gestures fulfill in the collaborative process of creating a mutually shared understanding of referring expressions. The implications bear on theories of gesture production, research on grounding, and the mechanisms underlying behavioral mimicry.

An experimental investigation of how addressee feedback affects co-speech gestures accompanying speakers’ responses

“…This includes Tabensky's (2001) descriptive analysis of how speakers rephrase their interlocutors' gestures -here the gestures provide feedback to the addressee by offering a new or slightly different interpretation of what they relayed earlier. Within this same group, we find studies that have focused on a related yet different aspect, namely, interlocutors reproducing the same gesture as the previous speaker, also referred to as gesture mimicry (de Fornel, 1992;Holler and Wilkin, 2011;Kimbara, 2006Kimbara, , 2008. For example, Holler and Wilkin (2011) provided an overview of how, in the context of referential communication, mimicked gestures can provide important feedback for the preceding speaker about the comprehensibility of the message, thus playing a role in the process of grounding (Clark and Brennan, 1991).…”

“…Within this same group, we find studies that have focused on a related yet different aspect, namely, interlocutors reproducing the same gesture as the previous speaker, also referred to as gesture mimicry (de Fornel, 1992;Holler and Wilkin, 2011;Kimbara, 2006Kimbara, , 2008. For example, Holler and Wilkin (2011) provided an overview of how, in the context of referential communication, mimicked gestures can provide important feedback for the preceding speaker about the comprehensibility of the message, thus playing a role in the process of grounding (Clark and Brennan, 1991). This is in line with findings from a study by Clark and Krych (2004) who examined the use of gestures performed on objects within a shared workspace.…”

52. Experimental methods in co-speech gesture research

“…For example, imagistic gestural representations are common in everyday conversation (e.g., Kendon 1985), and they occur frequently in laboratory-based communication, too (e.g., McNeill 1992); similar parallels can be claimed for interactive gestures (these involve the addressee in the interaction and are often associated with handing over a turn or keeping the floor) which have been observed both in the lab (Bavelas et al 1995;Bavelas et al 1992) as well as in everyday talk (Duncan and Niederehe 1974;Kendon 2004;Streeck and Hartge 1992). Further examples include the so-called "return gesture" (de Fornel 1992) where one participant in a conversation repeating another's gesture, which has also been observed in experimental contexts (Holler 2003;Holler and Wilkin 2011;Kimbara 2006Kimbara , 2008Parrill and Kimbara 2006). The parallels mentioned here are but a few and although no hard and fast evidence they serve to illustrate the point that gestural behaviour can be observed in experimental settings which, at least in some important aspects, is like that occurring outside the laboratory.…”

“…Bavelas et al 1995), as well as in cases where participants mirror their interactants' gestures (Holler 2003;Holler and Wilkin 2011;Kimbara 2006Kimbara , 2008Parrill and Kimbara 2006). Whereas the amount of detailed insights we can glean from such paradigms (e.g., exactly how the gesture was perceived/ interpreted by the addressee, or exactly how much information was received), this sort of paradigm preserves most of the natural interaction in which co-speech gestures are used.…”

“…Although not manipulating communicative intent directly, studies focusing on gestural mimicry (Holler and Wilkin 2011;Kimbara 2006Kimbara , 2008Parrill and Kimbara 2006) provide insight into the collaborative use of co-speech gestures and add further to our knowledge of communicative uses of co-speech gestures in communication.…”