Abstract
AbstractHuman face-to-face communication is multimodal: it comprises speech as well as visual cues, such as articulatory and limb gestures. In the current study, we assess how iconic gestures and mouth movements influence audiovisual word recognition. We presented video clips of an actress uttering single words accompanied, or not, by more or less informative iconic gestures. For each word we also measured the informativeness of the mouth movements from a separate lipreading task. We manipulated whether gestures were congruent or incongruent with the speech, and whether the words were audible or noise vocoded. The task was to decide whether the speech from the video matched a previously seen picture. We found that congruent iconic gestures aided word recognition, especially in the noise-vocoded condition, and the effect was larger (in terms of reaction times) for more informative gestures. Moreover, more informative mouth movements facilitated performance in challenging listening conditions when the speech was accompanied by gestures (either congruent or incongruent) suggesting an enhancement when both cues are present relative to just one. We also observed (a trend) that more informative mouth movements speeded up word recognition across clarity conditions, but only when the gestures were absent. We conclude that listeners use and dynamically weight the informativeness of gestures and mouth movements available during face-to-face communication.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Arts and Humanities (miscellaneous),Developmental and Educational Psychology,Experimental and Cognitive Psychology
Reference71 articles.
1. Arnold, P., & Hill, F. (2001). Bisensory augmentation: A speechreading advantage when speech is clearly audible and intact. British Journal of Psychology (London, England: 1953), 92(Pt. 2), 339–355.
2. Bank, R., Crasborn, O., & van Hoet, R. (2016). The prominence of spoken language elements in a sign language. Linguistics, 54(6), 1281–1305.
3. Barr, D. J., Levy, R., Scheepers, C., & Tily, H. J. (2013). Random effects structure for confirmatory hypothesis testing: Keep it maximal. Journal of Memory and Language, 68(3), 255–278. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2012.11.001
4. Bartoń, K. (2019). MuMIn: Multi-model inference (R Package Version 1.43.15) [Computer software]. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=MuMIn
5. Bates, D., Mächler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S. (2015). Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software, 67(1), 1–48. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v067.i01
Cited by
9 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献