Article published In:
GestureVol. 14:2 (2014) ► pp.225–253
Reporting practices in multimodal viewpoint research
A methodological meta-analysis
This study assesses methodological reporting practices in multimodal viewpoint research using the 51 primary studies previously synthesized by Stec (2012). These studies were coded for the designs and reporting practices associated with the collection and analysis of multimodal data in order to facilitate a discussion on current reporting practices. Results point to several systematic strengths, as well as to several systematic weaknesses. I discuss these trends in light of methodological reviews in other fields (e.g., Plonsky, 2013) and make a number of suggestions for reforming reporting practices with an aim to increase transparency and replicability.
Keywords: methodology, meta-analysis, research synthesis, gesture, sign language
References (76)
(Publications marked with an asterisk were included in the meta-analysis.)
Aarons, Debra & Ruth Zilla Morgan (2003). Classifier predicates and the creation of multiple perspectives in South African Sign Language. Sign Language Studies, 3 (2), 125–156. 
Alibali, Martha W. & Sotaro Kita (2010). Gesture highlights perceptually present information for speakers. Gesture, 10 (1), 3–28.
Alibali, Martha W., Robert C. Spencer, Lucy Knox, & Sotaro Kita (2011). Spontaneous gestures influence strategy choices in problem solving. Psychological Science, 22 (9), 1138–1144.
Alogna, V.K., M.K. Attaya, P. Aucoin, S. Bahnik, S. Birch, A.R. Birt, […] R.A. Zwaan (2014). Registered replication report: Schooler & Engstler-Schooler (1990). Perspectives on Psychological Science, 91, 556–578.
American Psychological Association (2010). Publication manual, 6th edition (APA Publication manual). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Beattie, Geoffrey & Heather Shovelton (2001). An experimental investigation of the role of different types of iconic gesture in communication: a semantic feature approach.Gesture, 1 (2), 129–149.
(2002). An experimental investigation of some properties of individual iconic gestures that mediate their communicative power. British Journal of Psychology, 931, 179–192.
Brentari, Diane, Marie Coppola, Laura Mazzoni, & Susan Goldin-Meadow (2011). When does a system becomephonological?Handshape production in gesturers, signers, and homesigners. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 301, 1–31.
Brown, Amanda (2008). Gesture viewpoint in Japanese and English. Gesture, 8 (2), 256–276.
Chafe, Wallace L. (1994). Discourse, consciousness and time. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Cumming, Geoff (2012). Understanding the new statistics: Effect sizes, confined intervals, and meta-analysis. New York: Routledge.
Downs, Sarah H. & Nick Black (1998). The feasibility of creating a checklist for the assessment of the methodological quality both of randomized and nonrandomized studies of health care interventions. Journal of Epidemiology & Community Health, 521, 377–384.
Dudis, Paul (2004). Body partitioning and real-space blends. Cognitive Linguistics, 15 (2), 223–238.
(2007). Types of depiction in ASL. Unpublished manuscript. Retrieved from: [URL], August 14, 2012.
Earis, Helen & Kearsy Cormier (2013). Point of view in British Sign Language and spoken English narrative discourse: the example of ‘The Tortoise and the Hare’. Language and Cognition, 5 (4), 314–343.
Ellis, Nick C. (2000). Editorial statement. Language Learning, 501, xi–xiii.
Enfield, Nicholas J. (2013). Doing fieldwork on the body, language, and communication. In Cornelia Müller, Alan Cienki, Ellen Fricke, Silva H. Ladewig, David McNeill, & Sedinha Teßendorf (Eds.), Body – language – communication: An international handbook on multimodality in human interaction, Vol. 11 (pp. 974–982). Berlin: de Gruyter Mouton.
Emmorey, Karen & Judy S. Reilly (1998). The development of quotation and reported action: conveying perspective in ASL. In Eve V. Clark (Ed.), Proceedings of the Twenty-Ninth Annual Child Research Forum (pp. 81–90). Stanford, CA: Center for the Study of Language and Information.
Emmorey, Karen, Barbara Tversky, & Holly A. Taylor (2000). Using space to describe space: Perspective in speech, sign, and gesture. Spatial Cognition and Computation, 21, 157–180.
Enfield, Nick J., Sotaro Kita, & Jan P. de Ruiter (2007). Primary and secondary pragmatic functions of pointing gestures. Journal of Pragmatics, 391, 1722–1741.
Fox, Barbara A. & Jessica Robles (2010). It’s like mmm: Enactments with it’s like. Discourse Studies, 121, 715–738.
Gerofsky, Susan (2010). Mathematical learning and gesture: Character viewpoint and observer viewpoint in students’ gestured graphs of functions. Gesture, 10 (2/3), 321–343.
Goodwin, Laura D. & William L. Goodwin (1985). An analysis of statistical techniques used in the Journal of Educational Psychology, 1979–1983. Educational Psychologist, 201, 13–21.
Haviland, John B. (1996).Projections, transpositions, and relativity. In John J. Gumperz & Stephen C. Levinson (Eds.), Rethinking linguistic relativity (pp. 271–323).Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Henrich, Joseph, Steven J. Heine, & Ara Norenzayan (2010). The weirdest people in the world? Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 33(2/3), 61–83.
Hostetter, Autumn B. (2011). When do gestures communicate? A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 137 (2), 297–315.
Janzen, Terry (2004). Space rotation, perspective shift, and verb morphology in ASL. Cognitive Linguistics, 15 (2), 149–174.
(2012). Two ways of conceptualizing space: Motivating the use of static and rotating vantage point space in ASL discourse. In Barbara Dancygier & Eve Sweetser (Eds.), Viewpoint in language: A multimodal perspective (pp. 156–175). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kendon, Adam (1980). Gesture and speech: Two aspects of the process of utterance. In Mary Ritchie Key (Ed.), Nonverbal communication and language (pp. 207–227). The Hague & Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
(1994). Do gestures communicate? A review. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 271, 175–200.
Kita, Sotaro (2009). Cross-cultural variation of speech-accompanying gestures: A review. Language and Cognitive Processes, 24 (2), 145–167.
Lakoff, George & Mark Johnson (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Larson-Hall, Jenifer & Luke Plonsky (2015). Reporting and interpreting quantitative research findings: What gets reported, and recommendations for the field. Language Learning, 65, Supp. 1, 127–159.
Lausberg, Hedda & Han Sloetjes (2009). Coding gestural behavior with the NEUROGES-ELAN system. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 41 (3), 841–849.
Liddell, Scott K. & Melanie Metzger (1998). Gesture in sign language discourse. Journal of Pragmatics, 30 (6), 657–697.
Lillo-Martin, Diane (1995). The point of view predicate in American Sign Language. In Karen Emmorey & Judy S. Reilly (Eds.), Language, gesture, and space. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Maury-Rouan, Claire (2011). Voices and bodies: Investigating nonverbal parameters of the participation framework. In Gale Stam & Mike Ishino (Eds.), Integrating gestures: The interdisciplinary nature of gesture (pp. 309–320). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
McClave, Evelyn Z. (2000). Linguistic functions of head movements in the context of speech. Journal of Pragmatics, 321, 855–878.
McCleary, Leland & Evani Viotti (2009). Sign-gesture symbiosis in Brazilian Sign Language narrative. In Fey Parrill, Vera Tobin, & Mark Turner (Eds.), Conceptual structure, discourse, and language 9 (pp. 181–201). Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.
Merola, Giorgio (2009). The effects of the gesture viewpoint on the students’ memory of words and stories. Gesture-based human-computer interaction and simulation lecture notes in computer science, 50851, 272–281.
Metzger, Melanie (1995). Constructed dialogue and constructed action in American Sign Language. In Ceil Lucas (Ed.), Sociolinguistics in deaf communities (pp. 255–271). Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press.
Narayan, Shweta (2012). Maybe what it means is he actually got the spot: Physical and cognitive viewpoint in a gesture study. In Barbara Dancygier & Eve Sweetser (Eds.), Viewpoint in language: A multimodal perspective (pp. 113–135). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Nuñez, Rafael & Eve Sweetser (2006). With the future behind them: Convergent evidence from Aymara language and gesture in the crosslinguistic comparison of spatial construals of time. Cognitive Science, 30 (3), 401–450.
Ochs, Elinor (1979). Transcription as theory. In Elinor Ochs & Bambi B. Schieffelin (Eds.), Developmental pragmatics (pp. 43–72). New York: Academic Press.
Ochs, Elinor, Sally Jacoby, & Patrick Gonzales (1994). Interpretive journeys: How physicists talk and travel through graphic space. Configurations, 2 (1), 151–171.
Orfanidou, Eleni, Bencie Woll, & Gary Morgan (2014). Research methods in sign language studies: A practical guide. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Blackwell.
Özyürek, Aslı, Sotaro Kita, Shanley Allen, Reyhan Furman, & Amanda Brown (2005). How does linguistic framing of events influence co-speech gestures? Insight from cross-linguistic variations and similarities. Gesture, 5 (1/2), 219–240.
Özyürek, Aslı & Pamela Perniss (2011). Event representation in sign language: A crosslinguistic perspective. In Jürgen Bohnemeyer & Eric Pederson (Eds.), Event representation in language: Encoding events at the language-cognition interface (pp. 84–107). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Padden, Carol (1990). The relation between space and grammar in ASL verb morphology. In Ceil Lucas (Ed.), Sign language research: Theoretical issues (pp. 118–132). Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press.
Park, Yujong (2009). Interaction between grammar and multimodal resources: Quoting different characters in Korean multiparty conversation. Discourse Studies, 11 (79), 79–104.
Parrill, Fey (2009). Dual viewpoint gestures.Gesture, 9 (3), 271–289.
(2010a). The hands are part of the package: Gesture, common ground, and information packaging. In John Newman & Sally Rice (Eds.), Empirical and experimental methods in cognitive/functional research (pp. 285–302). Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.
(2010b). Viewpoint in speech-gesture integration: Linguistic structure, discourse structure, and event structure.Language and Cognitive Processes, 25 (5), 650–668.
(2012). Interactions between discourse status and viewpoint in co-speech gesture. In Barbara Dancygier & Eve Sweetser (Eds.), Viewpoint in language: A multimodal perspective (pp. 97–112). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Parrill, Fey, Jennifer Bullen, & Huston Hoburg (2010). Effects of input modality on speech-gesture integration. Journal of Pragmatics, 42 (11), 3130–3137.
Parrill, Fey & Eve Sweetser (2004). What we mean by meaning: conceptual integration in gesture analysis and transcription. Gesture, 4 (2), 197–219.
Perniss, Pamela (2007). Achieving spatial coherence in German Sign Language narratives: The use of classifiers and perspective.Lingua, 117 (7), 1315–1338.
Perniss, Pamela & Aslı Özyürek (2008). Representations of action, motion and location in sign space: A comparison of German (DGS) and Turkish (TID) Sign Language narratives. In Josep Quer (Ed.), Signs of the time: Selected papers from TISLR 8 (pp. 353–378). Hamburg: Signum Press.
Pfau, Roland & Josep Quer (2010). Nonmanuals: Their prosodic and grammatical roles. In Diane Brentari (Ed.), Sign languages (pp. 381–402). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Plonsky, Luke (2013). Study quality in SLA: An assessment of designs, analyses, and reporting practices in quantitative L2 research. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 351, 655–687.
(2014). Study quality in quantitative L2 research (1990–2010): A methodological synthesis and call for reform. The Modern Language Journal, 98 (1), 450–470.
Plonsky, Luke & Susan Gass (2011). Quantitative research methods, study quality, and outcomes: The case of interaction research. Language Learning, 61 (2), 325–366.
Quinto-Pozos, David (2007). Can constructed action be considered obligatory? Lingua, 117 (7), 1285–1314.
Rayman, Jennifer (1999). Storytelling in the visual mode: A comparison of ASL and English. In Elizabeth Winston (Ed.), Storytelling and conversation: Discourse in deaf communities (pp. 59–82). Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press.
Schembri, Adam, Carloine Jone, & Denis Burnham (2005). Comparing action gestures and classifier verbs of motion: Evidence from Australian Sign Language, Taiwan Sign Language, and nonsigners’ gestures without speech. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 10 (3), 272–290.
Selinker, Larry & Usha Lakshmanan (2001). How do we know what we know? Why do we believe what we believe? Second Language Research, 171, 323–325.
Seyfeddinipur, Mandana (2011). Reasons for documenting gestures and suggestions for how to go about it. In Nicholas Thierberger (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of linguistic fieldwork (pp. 147–165). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Shaffer, Barbara (2012). Reported speech as an evidentiality strategy in American Sign Language. In Barbara Dancygier & Eve Sweetser (Eds.), Viewpoint in language: A multimodal perspective (pp. 139–155). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Sidnell, Jack (2006). Coordinating gesture, talk and gaze in reenactments. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 39 (4), 377–409.
Stec, Kashmiri (2012). Meaningful shifts: A review of viewpoint markers in co-speech gesture and sign language. Gesture, 12 (3), 327–360.
Streeck, Jürgen (2002). Grammar, words and embodied meanings: On the evolution and uses of so and like
. Journal of Communication, 521, 581–596.
Valentine, Jeffrey C. & Harris Cooper (2008). A systematic and transparent approach for assessing the methodological quality of intervention effectiveness research: The study design and implementation assessment device (Study DIAD). Psychological Methods, 131, 130–149.
Wright, Tracey (2001). Karen in motion: The role of physical enactment in developing an understanding of distance, time, and speed. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 201, 145–162.
Young, Katharine (2002). The dream body in somatic psychology: The kinaesthetics of gesture. Gesture, 2 (1), 45–70.
Zwaan, Rolf & Diane Pecher (2012). Revisiting mental simulation in language comprehension: Six replication attempts. PLoS ONE, 7 (12), e51382.