Andrew J Guydish
Biographic Data
| ID | 2790065 |
|---|---|
| NAME | Andrew J Guydish |
| GIVEN NAMES | Andrew J |
| FAMILY NAME | Guydish |
| SIGNATURE | GUYDISH A J |
| AFFILIATIONS | University of California, Santa Cruz |
| ORCID | 0000-0002-2368-1991 |
| VERIFIED | Yes |
| TOTAL WORKS | 6 |
| TOTAL CITATIONS | 9 |
| AUTHOR COUNT | 6 |
| EDITOR COUNT | 0 |
| FIRST PUBLICATION YEAR | 2021 |
| LATEST PUBLICATION YEAR | 2025 |
| H-INDEX | 2 |
Collateral signals and conversation quality
When we think of the quality of a conversation, what comes to mind? Generally, it is the content that was discussed during the conversation, with uplifting topics leading to positive experiences, and dispiriting topics leading to negative experiences. However, there is also a great deal of information that is exchanged in the process of conveying conversational content, such as how communicators get their words out, how they produce those words, …
Small talk in videoconferencing improves conversational experience and fosters relationships
Small talk plays a big role in conversational perception. In the study here, pairs of conversational participants engaged in three iterations of an ecologically valid task-break dialogue where the break was either small talk via videoconferencing or waiting the same amount of time with cameras and mics turned off. Small talk increased conversational participants' enjoyment of conversations, their willingness to engage in future conversations with…
Discourse markers in small talk and tasks
Discourse markers help people navigate conversations. We tested how the use of five discourse markers - so, but, oh, I think, and like - was influenced by communication medium (text, phone, videoconferencing) and conversation type (task-related conversation or small talk). Additionally, we tested whether these discourse markers influenced the amount of words contributed throughout the conversation and how interlocutors felt about their conversati…
In Pursuit of a Good Conversation: How Contribution Balance, Common Ground, and Conversational Closings Influence Conversation Assessment and Conversational Memory
How do people determine whether a conversation is good or bad? Do conversational phenomena (reaching common ground, striving to contribute equally, successful conversational closings) influence judgments of conversation quality and recall of conversations? We tested whether individuals reading previously transcribed conversations considered psycholinguistic characteristics in their assessments of whether the conversations were good or bad. Additi…
Reciprocity in Instant Messaging Conversations
We tested how the introduction and removal of well-defined roles influenced contribution behaviors in instant messaging conversations. Pairs of participants worked on a referential communication task where one participant (the director) had more information than the other (the matcher). Next, these roles were removed and the participants were allowed to communicate freely. Participants then switched director/matcher roles and the procedure was re…
Reciprocity in Conversation
This work provides initial evidence of reciprocity in conversation. We tested whether conversations with contribution imbalances brought on by task demands contained attempts to redress the created imbalance. Pairs of participants identified public art via phone communication. One member of the pair, the director, gave instructions using a map while the other, the follower, walked around a small town finding public art pieces. Later, trained rate…
Reciprocity in Instant Messaging Conversations
We tested how the introduction and removal of well-defined roles influenced contribution behaviors in instant messaging conversations. Pairs of participants worked on a referential communication task where one participant (the director) had more information than the other (the matcher). Next, these roles were removed and the participants were allowed to communicate freely. Participants then switched director/matcher roles and the procedure was re…
Reciprocity in Conversation
This work provides initial evidence of reciprocity in conversation. We tested whether conversations with contribution imbalances brought on by task demands contained attempts to redress the created imbalance. Pairs of participants identified public art via phone communication. One member of the pair, the director, gave instructions using a map while the other, the follower, walked around a small town finding public art pieces. Later, trained rate…
In Pursuit of a Good Conversation: How Contribution Balance, Common Ground, and Conversational Closings Influence Conversation Assessment and Conversational Memory
How do people determine whether a conversation is good or bad? Do conversational phenomena (reaching common ground, striving to contribute equally, successful conversational closings) influence judgments of conversation quality and recall of conversations? We tested whether individuals reading previously transcribed conversations considered psycholinguistic characteristics in their assessments of whether the conversations were good or bad. Additi…
Reciprocity in Conversation
This work provides initial evidence of reciprocity in conversation. We tested whether conversations with contribution imbalances brought on by task demands contained attempts to redress the created imbalance. Pairs of participants identified public art via phone communication. One member of the pair, the director, gave instructions using a map while the other, the follower, walked around a small town finding public art pieces. Later, trained rate…
Reciprocity in Instant Messaging Conversations
We tested how the introduction and removal of well-defined roles influenced contribution behaviors in instant messaging conversations. Pairs of participants worked on a referential communication task where one participant (the director) had more information than the other (the matcher). Next, these roles were removed and the participants were allowed to communicate freely. Participants then switched director/matcher roles and the procedure was re…
In Pursuit of a Good Conversation: How Contribution Balance, Common Ground, and Conversational Closings Influence Conversation Assessment and Conversational Memory
How do people determine whether a conversation is good or bad? Do conversational phenomena (reaching common ground, striving to contribute equally, successful conversational closings) influence judgments of conversation quality and recall of conversations? We tested whether individuals reading previously transcribed conversations considered psycholinguistic characteristics in their assessments of whether the conversations were good or bad. Additi…
Discourse markers in small talk and tasks
Discourse markers help people navigate conversations. We tested how the use of five discourse markers - so, but, oh, I think, and like - was influenced by communication medium (text, phone, videoconferencing) and conversation type (task-related conversation or small talk). Additionally, we tested whether these discourse markers influenced the amount of words contributed throughout the conversation and how interlocutors felt about their conversati…
Collateral signals and conversation quality
When we think of the quality of a conversation, what comes to mind? Generally, it is the content that was discussed during the conversation, with uplifting topics leading to positive experiences, and dispiriting topics leading to negative experiences. However, there is also a great deal of information that is exchanged in the process of conveying conversational content, such as how communicators get their words out, how they produce those words, …
Small talk in videoconferencing improves conversational experience and fosters relationships
Small talk plays a big role in conversational perception. In the study here, pairs of conversational participants engaged in three iterations of an ecologically valid task-break dialogue where the break was either small talk via videoconferencing or waiting the same amount of time with cameras and mics turned off. Small talk increased conversational participants' enjoyment of conversations, their willingness to engage in future conversations with…
Communication (6 works) · Conversation (6 works) · Psychology (6 works) · Language, Discourse, Communication Strategies (5 works) · Speech and dialogue systems (5 works) · Linguistics (4 works) · Social Psychology (4 works) · Cognitive psychology (3 works) · Communication (3 works) · Conversation analysis (3 works)