Assessing Others’ Knowledge Through Their Speech Disfluencies and Gestures
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 7150348 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Can Avcı (0009-0008-9204-3150, Department of Psychology Koç University, corresponding author), Demet Özer (0000-0003-3230-2874, Department of Psychology Bilkent University), Terry Eskenazi (0000-0001-6777-0753, Department of Psychology Bilkent University), Tilbe Göksun (0000-0002-0190-7988, Department of Psychology Koç University) |
| Year | 2025 |
| Volume | 49 |
| Issue | 11 |
| Pages | e70144-e70144 |
| Publication date | 2025-11-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Cognitive Science (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0364-0213 • E-ISSN: 1551-6709 |
| Publisher | Wiley (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1111/cogs.70144 |
| PMID | 41306008 |
| OpenAlex | W4416732207 |
| Language | EN |
| References cited | 63 |
As part of the multimodal language system, gestures play a vital role for listeners, by capturing attention and providing information. Similarly, disfluencies serve as a cue for the listeners about one's knowledge on a topic. In two studies, the first study with natural and the second study with controlled stimuli, we asked whether the combination of gestures and speech disfluencies would affect how listeners made feeling‐of‐another's‐knowing (FOAK) judgments regarding speakers’ knowledge states. In Study 1, we showed participants videos of speakers providing navigational instruction. We manipulated the speakers’ use of gestures and speech disfluencies, whereas facial expressions, words, and additional visual cues (e.g., background, clothes, objects) naturally occurred. We found that fluent speech elicited higher FOAK ratings than disfluent speech, but no significant effect was found for gestures. In the follow‐up Study 2, we examined the same disfluency‐gesture interaction in a more controlled setting using video stimuli with an actress controlling for background, intonation, and word choice, as well as iconic and beat gesture types as gesture subcategories. Participants also filled out the Gesture Awareness Scale. Results were identical with the first study, in which only the disfluent speech received significantly lower FOAK ratings, revealing no effects of gesture use or type. These findings suggest that individuals may use certain communicative cues more than others, particularly in the context of assessing others’ knowledge
Gesture · Nonverbal communication · Speech production · Action Observation and Synchronization · Hearing Impairment and Communication · Multisensory perception and integration
On the Course of Answering Questions
Effects of Visibility between Speaker and Listener on Gesture Production
The Feeling of Another′s Knowing
Memory and the feeling-of-knowing experience.
How do gestures influence thinking and speaking? The gesture-for-conceptualization hypothesis.
Statistical power analyses using G*Power 3.1
LmerTest Package
Speech-gesture mismatches
Exploring the status of filled pauses as pragmatic markers
An analysis of the determinants of the feeling of knowing
That’s thee, uuh blicket! How does disfluency affect children’s word learning
Gesture and the communicative intention of the speaker
Foreground gesture, background gesture
Disfluency Rates in Conversation
Speech Disfluencies and Hand Gestures as Metacognitive Cues
When do gestures communicate? A meta-analysis
Hesitation Phenomena in Spontaneous English Speech
Gesture
The Effect of Common Ground on How Speakers Use Gesture and Speech to Represent Size Information
| Citation velocity | historical |
|---|---|
| Highly cited | No |