View in EDS

Structural alignment in dialogue and monologue (and what attention may have to do with it).

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Structural alignment in dialogue and monologue (and what attention may have to do with it).
Authors: Ivanova, Iva1 (AUTHOR) imivanova@utep.edu, Horton, William S.2 (AUTHOR), Swets, Benjamin3 (AUTHOR), Kleinman, Daniel4 (AUTHOR), Ferreira, Victor S.5 (AUTHOR)
Source: Journal of Memory & Language. Feb2020, Vol. 110, pN.PAG-N.PAG. 1p.
Subject Terms: *Attention, *Communication, *Conversation, *Experimental design, *Theory, *Data analysis, Photography, Psychology, Reaction time, Statistics, Task performance
Abstract: • Structure planning employs comprehension: • Speech of others affects what we mention. • This alignmen t's still found • When there's no one around, • Though a partner sustains our attention. In the Interactive Alignment Theory, alignment is promoted by dialogic features on a dialogue-monologue continuum. More alignment in prototypical dialogue (a chat among friends) than in prototypical monologue (a lecture) seems plausible, but the role of other dialogic features for alignment is less clear. The current study tests the joint influence of two such features: communicative intent and a live interlocutor. Four structural priming experiments contrasted the magnitude of structural alignment between a dialogue situation that involved a joint task and an otherwise identical monologue situation that lacked a communicative component. None of the four experiments showed any statistical differences in alignment between dialogue and monologue. Post-hoc analyses on the pooled data of Experiments 2–4 further suggested that individual differences in attention (operationalized through reaction time variability in the picture verification component of the task we used to elicit alignment) might modulate overall structural alignment, and that dialogue (presumably through sustaining attention) might be able to sustain alignment over time to a greater extent than monologue. These results suggest a role for attention in supporting structural alignment, but the lack of clear differences between alignment magnitudes in monologue and dialogue (absent in individual experiments and weak even in the pooled analyses) suggests that communicative intent and a physically-present interlocutor have at best a minor role in promoting alignment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
Copyright of Journal of Memory & Language is the property of Elsevier B.V. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
Database: Education Research Complete
Description
Abstract:• Structure planning employs comprehension: • Speech of others affects what we mention. • This alignmen t's still found • When there's no one around, • Though a partner sustains our attention. In the Interactive Alignment Theory, alignment is promoted by dialogic features on a dialogue-monologue continuum. More alignment in prototypical dialogue (a chat among friends) than in prototypical monologue (a lecture) seems plausible, but the role of other dialogic features for alignment is less clear. The current study tests the joint influence of two such features: communicative intent and a live interlocutor. Four structural priming experiments contrasted the magnitude of structural alignment between a dialogue situation that involved a joint task and an otherwise identical monologue situation that lacked a communicative component. None of the four experiments showed any statistical differences in alignment between dialogue and monologue. Post-hoc analyses on the pooled data of Experiments 2–4 further suggested that individual differences in attention (operationalized through reaction time variability in the picture verification component of the task we used to elicit alignment) might modulate overall structural alignment, and that dialogue (presumably through sustaining attention) might be able to sustain alignment over time to a greater extent than monologue. These results suggest a role for attention in supporting structural alignment, but the lack of clear differences between alignment magnitudes in monologue and dialogue (absent in individual experiments and weak even in the pooled analyses) suggests that communicative intent and a physically-present interlocutor have at best a minor role in promoting alignment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
ISSN:0749596X
DOI:10.1016/j.jml.2019.104052