Cover not available
Part of
Why Gesture?: How the hands function in speaking, thinking and communicating
Edited by Ruth Breckinridge Church, Martha W. Alibali and Spencer D. Kelly
[Gesture Studies 7] 2017
► pp. 213–240

Chapter 10
Multi-modal communication of common ground

A review of social functions

Until recently, the literature on common ground depicted its influence as a purely verbal phenomenon. We review current research on how common ground influences gesture. With informative exceptions, most experiments found that speakers used fewer gestures as well as fewer words in common ground contexts; i.e., the gesture/word ratio did not change. Common ground often led to more poorly articulated gestures, which parallels its effect on words. These findings support the principle of recipient design as well as more specific social functions such as grounding, the given-new contract, and Grice’s maxims. However, conceptual pacts or linking old with new information may maintain the original form. All together, these findings implicate gesture-speech ensembles rather than isolated effects on gestures alone.

Article outline
  • Common ground and verbal utterance design
    • Personal common ground
    • Incremental common ground
  • Multi-modal investigations of common ground
    • Reduction of word frequency
    • Social effects on the frequency and form of gestures
      • Visibility
      • Addressee effects
      • Dialogue vs. monologue
    • Effects of personal (prior) common ground on gestures
      • Rate measures
      • Comparison of form
    • Effects of incremental common ground on gestures
      • Rate measures
      • Comparison of form
    • General conclusions
  • Social functions of gestures in common ground contexts
    • Functions of gestures in studies of personal common ground
      • Gestures can serve the maxim of quantity
      • Gestures may avoid prolixity
      • “Remember when …. ?”: Prominent gestures may link common ground with new information
    • Functions of gestures in studies of incremental common ground
      • Gestural form can mark information as given
      • Grounding
      • Conceptual pacts
  • The flexible interplay of speech and gesture in common ground contexts
  • Conclusions
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 26 April 2017
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/gs.7.11hol
References
Alibali, Martha W., Heath, Dana C. and Meyers, Heather J.
2001 “Effects of visibility between speakers and listeners on gesture production: Some gestures are meant to be seen.” Journal of Memory and Language 44: 169–188. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Alibali, Martha W. and Nathan, Mitchell J.
2012 “Embodiment in mathematics teaching and learning: Evidence from learners' and teachers' gestures.” Journal of the Learning Sciences 21: 247–286. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Alibali, Martha W., Nathan, Mitchell J., Church, Ruth B., Wolfgram, Matthew S., Kim, Suyeon and Knuth, Eric J.
2013 “Teachers’ gestures and speech in mathematics lessons: forging common ground by resolving trouble spots.” ZDM Mathematics Education 45: 425–440. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Alibali, M. W., Nathan, M. J., Wolfgram, Matthew S., Church, Ruth B., Jacobs, Steven A., Johnson Martinez, Chelsea and Knuth, Eric. J.
2014 “How teachers link ideas in mathematics instruction using speech and gesture: A corpus analysis.” Cognition and Instruction 32: 65–100. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bard, Ellen G., Anderson, Anne H., Sotillo, Catherine, Aylett, Matthew, Doherty-Sneddon, Gwyneth and Newlands, Alison
2000 “Controlling the intelligibility of referring expressions in dialogue.” Journal of Memory and Language 42: 1–22. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bavelas, Janet B. and Chovil, Nicole
2000 “Visible acts of meaning. An integrated message model of language use in face-to-face dialogue.” Journal of Language and Social Psychology 19: 163–194. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2006 “Hand gestures and facial displays as part of language use in face-to-face dialogue.” In Handbook of Nonverbal Communication, Valerie Manusov and Miles Patterson (eds), 97–115. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bavelas, Janet B., Chovil, Nicole, Coates, Linda and Roe, Lori
1995 “Gestures specialized for dialogue.” Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 21: 394–405. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bavelas, Janet B., Chovil, Nicole, Lawrie, Douglas A. and Wade, Allan
1992 “Interactive gestures.” Discourse Processes 15: 469–489. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bavelas, Janet B., Coates, Linda and Johnson, Trudy
2000 “Listeners as co-narrators.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 79: 941–952. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bavelas, Janet B., Gerwing, Jennifer, Allison, Meredith and Sutton, Chantelle
2011 “Dyadic evidence for grounding with abstract deictic gestures.” In Integrating Gestures: The Interdisciplinary Nature of Gesture, Gale Stam and Mika Ishino (eds), 49–60. Amsterdam: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bavelas, Janet B., Gerwing, Jennifer and Healing, Sara
2014a “The effect of dialogue on demonstrations: Direct quotations, facial portrayals, hand gestures, and figurative references.” Discourse Processes 51: 619–655. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2014b “Including facial gestures in gesture-speech ensembles.” In From Gesture in Conversation to Visible Action as Utterance. Essays in Honor of Adam Kendon, Mandana Seyfeddinipur and Marianne Gullberg (eds), 15–34. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Bavelas, Janet B., Gerwing, Jennifer, Sutton, Chantelle and Prevost, Danielle
2008 “Gesturing on the telephone: Independent effects of dialogue and visibility.” Journal of Memory and Language 58: 495–520. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bavelas, Janet B. and Healing, Sara
2013 “Reconciling the effects of mutual visibility on gesturing. A review.” Gesture 13: 63–92. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bavelas, Janet B., De Jong, Peter, Korman, Harry and Smock Jordan, Sara
2012 “Beyond back-channels: A three-step model of grounding in face-to-face dialogue.” In Proceedings of the Interdisciplinary Workshop on Feedback Behaviors in Dialog 5–6. September 7–8, Stevenson, WA.Google Scholar
Brennan, Susan E. and Clark, Herbert H.
1996 “Conceptual pacts and lexical choice in conversation.” Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 22: 1482–1493.Google Scholar
Brennan, Susan E. and Hanna, Joy E.
2009 “Partner-specific adaptation in dialogue.” Topics in Cognitive Science 1: 274–291. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brown-Schmidt, Sarah
2009 “Partner-specific interpretation of maintained referential precedents during interactive dialog.” Journal of Memory and Language 61: 171–190. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brown-Schmidt, Sarah, Gunlogson, Christine and Tanenhaus, Michael K.
2008 “Addressees distinguish shared from private information when interpreting questions during interactive conversation.” Cognition 107: 1122–1134. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Campisi, Emanuella and Özyürek, Asli
2013 “Iconicity as a communicative strategy: Recipient design in multimodal demonstrations for adults and children.” Journal of Pragmatics 47: 14–27. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chafe, Wallace L.
1994 Discourse, Consciousness, and Time: The Flow and Displacement of Conscious Experience in Speaking and Writing. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Clark, Herbert H.
1996 Using Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Clark, Herbert H. and Brennan, Susan E.
1991 “Grounding in communication.” In Perspectives on Socially Shared Cognition, Lauren B. Resnick, John M. Levine, and Stephanie D. Teasley (eds), 127–149. Washington: APA Books. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Clark, Herbert H. and Carlson, Thomas B.
1982 “Hearers and speech acts.” Language 58: 332–373. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Clark, Herbert H. and Haviland, Susan E.
1977 “Comprehension and the given-new contract. Discourse production and comprehension.” Discourse Processes: Advances in Research and Theory 1: 1–40.Google Scholar
Clark, Herbert H. and Marshall, Catherine R.
1981 “Definite reference and mutual knowledge.” In Elements of discourse understanding, Aravind K. Joshi, Bruce Webber, and Ivan Sag (eds), 10–63. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Clark, Herbert H. and Murphy, Gregory L.
1983 “Audience design in meaning and reference.” In Language and Comprehension, Jean-François Le Ny and Walter Kintsch (eds), 287–299. Amsterdam: North-Holland Publishing Co.Google Scholar
Clark, Herbert H. and Schaefer, Edward F.
1987 “Collaborating on contributions to conversations.” Language and Cognitive Processes 2: 19–41. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1989 “Contributing to discourse.” Cognitive Science 13: 259–294. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Clark, Herbert H., Schreuder, Robert and Buttrick, Samuel
1983 “Common ground and the understanding of demonstrative reference.” Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 22: 245–258. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Clark, Herbert H. and Wilkes-Gibbs, Donna
1986 “Referring as a collaborative process.” Cognition 22: 1–39. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cohen, Akiba A.
1977 “The communicative functions of hand illustrators.” Journal of Communication 27: 54–63. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cohen, Akiba A. and Harrison, Randall P.
1973 “Intentionality in the use of hand illustrators in face-to-face communication situations.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 28: 276–279. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Emmorey, Karen and Casey, Shannon
2001 “Gesture, thought and spatial language.” Gesture 1: 35–50. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Enfield, Nick J., Kita, Sotaro and De Ruiter, Jan Peter
2007 “Primary and secondary pragmatic functions of pointing gestures.” Journal of Pragmatics 39: 1722–1741. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fillmore, Charles
1981 “Pragmatics and the description of discourse.” In Radical Pragmatics, Peter Cole (ed), 143–166. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Firth, John R.
1957 “The technique of semantics.” In Papers in Linguistics 1934–1951, John R. Firth (ed), 7–33. London: Oxford University Press. (Paper originally published in 1935.) Google Scholar
Fowler, Carol A.
1988 “Differential shortening of repeated content words produced in various communicative contexts.” Language and Speech 31: 307–319.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fowler, Carol A. and Housum, Jonathan
1987 “Talkers’ signaling of ‘new’ and ‘old’ words in speech and listeners’ perception and use of the distinction.” Journal of Memory and Language 26: 489–504. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fussell, Susan R. and Krauss, Robert M.
1989 “The effects of intended audience on message production and comprehension: Reference in a common ground framework.” Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 25: 203–219. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1992 “Coordination of knowledge in communication: effects of speakers' assumptions about what others know.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 62: 378–391. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Galati, Alexia and Brennan, Susan E.
2010 “Attenuating repeated information: For the speaker, or for the addressee?” Journal of Memory and Language 62: 35–51. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2014 “Speakers adapt gestures to addressees’ knowledge: Implications for models of co-speech gesture.” Language, Cognition, and Neuroscience 29: 435–451. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Garfinkel, Harold
1967 Studies in Ethnomethodology. Englewood Cliff, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
Gerwing, Jennifer
2003 The effect of immediate communicative function on the physical form of conversational hand gestures. Unpublished Masters thesis, University of Victoria, Victoria, British Columbia.Google Scholar
Gerwing, Jennifer and Bavelas, Janet B.
2004 “Linguistic influences on gesture’s form.” Gesture 4: 157–195. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goodwin, Charles
1986 “Gesture as a resource for the organization of mutual orientation.” Semiotica 62: 29–49. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Grice, Herbert P.
1975 “Logic and conversation.” In Syntax and Semantics, Vol. 3: Speech Acts, Peter Cole and Jerry L. Morgan (eds), 45–58. New York: Seminar Press.Google Scholar
Gullberg, Marianne and Kita, Sotaro
2009 “Attention to speech-accompanying gestures: Eye movements and information uptake.” Journal of Nonverbal Behavior 33: 251–277. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hanna, Joy E. and Tanenhaus, Michael K.
2004 “Pragmatic effects on reference resolution in a collaborative task: Evidence from eye movements.” Cognitive Science 28: 105–115. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Haviland, Susan E. and Clark, Herbert H.
1974 “What's new? Acquiring new information as a process in comprehension.” Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 13: 512–521. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hilliard, Caitlin and Cook, Susan W.
2015 “Bridging gaps in common ground: Speakers design their gestures for their listeners.” Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 42: 91–103.Google Scholar
Hoetjes, Marieke, Koolen, Ruud, Goudbeek, Martijn, Krahmer, Emiel and Swerts, Marc
2015 “Reduction in gesture during the production of repeated references.” Journal of Memory and Language 79–80: 1–17.Google Scholar
Holler, Judith
2010 “Speakers’ use of interactive gestures to mark common ground.” In Gesture in Embodied Communication and Human-Computer Interaction. 8th International Gesture Workshop, Bielefeld, Germany, 2009; Selected Revised Papers, Stefan Kopp, and Ipke Wachsmuth (eds), 11–22. Heidelberg: Springer Verlag.Google Scholar
Holler, Judith and Stevens, Rachel
2007 “An experimental investigation into the effect of common ground on how speakers use gesture and speech to represent size information in referential communication.” Journal of Language and Social Psychology 26: 4–27. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Holler, Judith, Turner, Kylie and Varcianna, Trudy
2013 “It's on the tip of my fingers: Co-speech gestures during lexical retrieval in different social contexts.” Language and Cognitive Processes 28: 1509–1518. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Holler, Judith, Tutton, Mark and Wilkin, Katie
2011 “Co-speech gestures in the process of meaning coordination.” In Proceedings of the 2nd GESPIN – Gesture and Speech in Interaction Conference, Bielefeld, 5–7 Sep 2011 Petra Wagner (ed).Google Scholar
Holler, Judith and Wilkin, Katie
2009 “Communicating common ground: how mutually shared knowledge influences the representation of semantic information in speech and gesture in a narrative task.” Language and Cognitive Processes 24: 267–289. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2011a “An experimental investigation of how addressee feedback affects co-speech gestures accompanying speakers’ responses.” Journal of Pragmatics 43: 3522–3536. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2011b “Co-speech gesture mimicry in the process of collaborative referring during face-to-face dialogue.” Journal of Nonverbal Behavior 35: 133–153. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Horton, William S. and Keysar, Boaz
1996 “When do speakers take into account common ground?” Cognition 59: 91–117. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hostetter, Autumn B., Alibali, Martha W. and Schrager, Sheree M.
2011 “If you don’t already know, I’m certainly not going to show you!” In Integrating Gestures: The Interdisciplinary Nature of Gesture, Gale Stam and Mika Ishino (eds), 61–74. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Isaacs, Ellen A. and Clark, Herbert H.
1987 “References in conversations between experts and novices.” Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 116: 26–37. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jacobs, Naomi and Garnham, Alan
2007 “The role of conversational hand gestures in a narrative task.” Journal of Memory and Language 56: 291–303. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kelly, Spencer, Byrne, Kelly and Holler, Judith
2011 “Raising the stakes of communication: Evidence for increased gesture production as predicted by the GSA framework.” Information 2: 579–593. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kendon, Adam
1972 “Some relationships between body motion and speech.” In Studies in Dyadic Communication, Aron Siegman and Benjamin Pope (eds), 177–216. Elmsford, New York: Pergamon Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1980 “Gesticulation and speech: Two aspects of the process of utterance.” In The relationship of verbal and nonverbal communication, Mary Ritchie Key (ed), 207–227. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
1985 “Some uses of gesture.” In Perspectives on Silence, Deborah Tannen and Muriel Saville-Troike (eds), 215–234. Norwood, MA: Ablex.Google Scholar
2004 Gesture: Visible Action as Utterance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Keysar, Boaz, Barr, Dale J., Balin, Jennifer A. and Brauner, Jason S.
2000 “Taking perspective in conversation: The role of mutual knowledge in comprehension.” Psychological Science 11: 32–38. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kimbara, Irene
2008 “Gesture form convergence in joint description.” Journal of Nonverbal Behavior 32: 123–131. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Krauss, Robert M., Dushay, Robert A., Chen, Yihsiu and Rauscher, Frances
1995 “The communicative value of conversational hand gestures.” Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 31: 533–552. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Krauss, Robert M. and Glucksberg, Sam
1977 “Social and nonsocial speech.” Scientific American 236: 100–105. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Krauss, Robert M. and Weinheimer, Sidney
1964 “Changes in reference phrases as a function of frequency of usage in social interaction: A preliminary study.” Psychonomic Science 1: 113–114. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1966 “Concurrent feedback, confirmation, and the encoding of referents in verbal communication.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 4: 343–346. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kraut, Robert E., Lewis, Steven H. and Swezey, Lawrence W.
1982 “Listener responsiveness and the coordination of conversation.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 43: 718–731. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kronmüller, Edmundo and Barr, Dale J.
2007 “Perspective-free pragmatics: Broken precedents and the recovery-from-preemption hypothesis.” Journal of Memory and Language 56: 436–455. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kuhlen, Anna K. and Brennan, Susan E.
2010 “Anticipating distracted addressees: How speakers’ expectations and addressees’ feedback influence storytelling.” Discourse Processes 47: 567–587. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kuhlen, Anna K., Galati, Alexia and Brennan, Susan E.
2012 “Gesturing integrates top-down and bottom-up information: Effects of speakers’ expectations and addressees’ feedback.” Language and Cognition 4: 17–41. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Levinson, Stephen C.
1983  Pragmatics. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
1988 “Putting linguistics on a proper footing: Explorations in Goffman's participation framework.” In Goffman: Exploring the Interaction Order, Paul Drew and Anthony Wootton (eds), 161–227. Oxford: Polity Press.Google Scholar
2007 “Optimizing person reference – perspectives from usage on Rossel Island.” In Person Reference in Interaction: Linguistic, Cultural, and Social Perspectives, Nick Enfield and Tanya Stivers (eds.), 29–72. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Linell, Per
1982 The Written Language Bias in Linguistics. Linköping, Sweden: University of Linköping. (Republished in 2005; London: Routledge).Google Scholar
Lockridge, Calion B. and Brennan, Susan E.
2002 “Addressees’ needs influence speakers’ early syntactic choices.” Psychonomic Bulletin and Review 9: 550–557. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Luckmann, Thomas
1990 “Social communication, dialogue and conversation.” In The Dynamics of Dialogue, Ivana Markovà and Klaus Foppa (eds), 45–61. New York: Harvester Wheatsheaf.Google Scholar
McNeill, David
1985 “So you think gestures are nonverbal?” Psychological Review 92: 350–371. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1992 Hand and Mind: What Gestures Reveal About Thought. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
2005 Gesture and Thought. Chicago: University of Chicago Press DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2012 How Language Began: Gesture and Speech in Human Evolution. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Metzing, Charles and Brennan, Susan E.
2003 “When conceptual pacts are broken: Partner-specific effects in the comprehension of referring expressions.” Journal of Memory and Language 49: 201–213. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mol, Lisette, Krahmer, Emiel, Maes, Alfons and Swerts, Marc
2009 “The communicative import of gesture: Evidence from a comparative analysis of human-human and human-machine interactions.” Gesture 9: 97–126. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2011 “Seeing and being seen: The effects on gesture production.” Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 17: 77–100. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2012 “Adaptation in gesture: Converging hands or converging minds?” Journal of Memory and Language 66: 249–264. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nathan, Mitchell J.
2008 “An embodied cognition perspective on symbols, grounding, and instructional gesture.” In Symbols, Embodiment and Meaning: A Debate, Manuel De Vega, Arthur M. Glenberg, and Arthur C. Graesser (eds), 375–396. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nathan, Mitchell J. and Alibali, Martha W.
2011 “How gesture use enables intersubjectivity in the classroom.” In Integrating Gestures: The Interdisciplinary Nature of Gesture, Gale Stam and Mika Ishino (eds), 257–266. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Peeters, David, Chu, Mingyuan, Holler, Judith, Hagoort, Peter and Özyürek, Asli
2015 “Electrophysiological and kinematic correlates of communicative intent in the planning and production of pointing gestures.” Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 27: 2352–2368. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pickering, Martin and Garrod, Simon
2004 “Toward a mechanistic psychology of dialogue.” Brain and Behavioral Sciences 27: 169–226. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pine, Karen J., Gurney, Daniel J. and Fletcher, Ben
2010 “The semantic specificity hypothesis: When gestures do not depend upon the presence of a listener.” Journal of Nonverbal Behavior 34: 169–178. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rimé, Bernard
1982 “The elimination of visible behavior from social interactions: Effects on verbal, nonverbal and interpersonal variables.” European Journal of Social Psychology 12: 113–129. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
de Ruiter, Jan Peter, Bangerter, Adrian and Dings, Paula
2012 “The interplay between gesture and speech in the production of referring expressions: Investigating the tradeoff hypothesis.” Topics in Cognitive Science 4: 232–248. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sacks, Harvey, Schegloff, Emanuel A. and Jefferson, Gale
1974 “A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation.” Language 50: 696–735. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schober, Michael F. and Clark, Herbert H.
1989 “Understanding by addressees and overhearers.” Cognitive Psychology 21: 211–232. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schubotz, Louise, Holler, Judith and Özyürek, Asli
2015 “Age-related differences in multi-modal audience design: Young, but not old speakers, adapt speech and gestures to their addressee's knowledge.” In Proceedings of the 4th GESPIN – Gesture and Speech in Interaction Conference, Nantes, France, September 2–4, 2015, Gaelle Ferre and Mark Tutton (eds),Google Scholar
Sebanz, Natalie and Knoblich, Guenther
2009 “Prediction in joint action: What, when, and where.” Topics in Cognitive Science 1: 353–367. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stalnaker, Robert
1978 “Assertion.” In Syntax and semantics 9, Peter Cole (ed), 315–322. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Streeck, Juergen
1993 “Gesture as communication I: its coordination with gaze and speech.” Communication Monographs 60: 275–299. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tomasello, Michael
2008 The Origins of Human Communication. Massachusetts: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Woods, Jonathan
2005 New vs. Given Information: Do Gestures Dance to The Same Tune as Aords? Unpublished honours thesis, Department of Psychology, University of Victoria, Victoria, B.C., Canada.Google Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 14 other publications

Alibali, Martha W., Mitchell J. Nathan, Rebecca Boncoddo & Elizabeth Pier
2019. Managing common ground in the classroom: teachers use gestures to support students’ contributions to classroom discourse. ZDM 51:2 ► pp. 347 ff. DOI logo
Clough, Sharice, Victoria-Grace Padilla, Sarah Brown-Schmidt & Melissa C. Duff
2023. Intact speech-gesture integration in narrative recall by adults with moderate-severe traumatic brain injury. Neuropsychologia 189 ► pp. 108665 ff. DOI logo
Hilverman, Caitlin, Sarah Brown-Schmidt & Melissa C. Duff
2019. Gesture height reflects common ground status even in patients with amnesia. Brain and Language 190 ► pp. 31 ff. DOI logo
Holler, Judith
2022. Visual bodily signals as core devices for coordinating minds in interaction. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 377:1859 DOI logo
Holler, Judith, Janet Bavelas, Jonathan Woods, Mareike Geiger & Lauren Simons
2022. Given-New Effects on the Duration of Gestures and of Words in Face-to-Face Dialogue. Discourse Processes 59:8 ► pp. 619 ff. DOI logo
Lepeut, Alysson & Emily Shaw
2022. Time Is Ripe to Make Interactional Moves: Bringing Evidence From Four Languages Across Modalities. Frontiers in Communication 7 DOI logo
Marentette, Paula, Reyhan Furman, Marcus E. Suvanto & Elena Nicoladis
2020. Pantomime (Not Silent Gesture) in Multimodal Communication: Evidence From Children’s Narratives. Frontiers in Psychology 11 DOI logo
Rasenberg, Marlou, Wim Pouw, Asli Özyürek & Mark Dingemanse
2022. The multimodal nature of communicative efficiency in social interaction. Scientific Reports 12:1 DOI logo
Rojc, Matej, Zdravko Kačič & Izidor Mlakar
2018. Advanced Content and Interface Personalization through Conversational Behavior and Affective Embodied Conversational Agents. In Artificial Intelligence - Emerging Trends and Applications, DOI logo
Schubotz, Louise, Aslı Özyürek & Judith Holler
2019. Age-related differences in multimodal recipient design: younger, but not older adults, adapt speech and co-speech gestures to common ground. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience 34:2 ► pp. 254 ff. DOI logo
Sowińska, Agnieszka & Monika Boruta-Żywiczyńska
2020. Gestures in patients’ presentation of medically unexplained symptoms (MUS). Gesture 19:1 ► pp. 97 ff. DOI logo
Türk, Olcay & Sasha Calhoun
2023. Phrasal Synchronization of Gesture With Prosody and Information Structure. Language and Speech DOI logo
Wilson, Jack
2024. Pragmatics, Utterance Meaning, and Representational Gesture, DOI logo
[no author supplied]
2022. The Multimodal Performance of Conversational Humor [Figurative Thought and Language, 13], DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 12 april 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.