Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-6c8bd87754-lkb8j Total loading time: 0.28 Render date: 2022-01-17T00:40:23.710Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": true, "newCiteModal": false, "newCitedByModal": true, "newEcommerce": true, "newUsageEvents": true }

THE OCCURRENCE AND PERCEPTION OF LISTENER VISUAL CUES DURING NONUNDERSTANDING EPISODES

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 May 2019

Kim McDonough*
Affiliation:
Concordia University
Pavel Trofimovich
Affiliation:
Concordia University
Libing Lu
Affiliation:
Concordia University
Dato Abashidze
Affiliation:
Concordia University
*
*Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Kim McDonough, 1455 de Maisonneuve Blvd. W., Education Department, FG 6-151, Montreal, QC H3G 1M8 Canada. E-mail: kim.mcdonough@concordia.ca

Abstract

This research report examines the occurrence of listener visual cues during nonunderstanding episodes and investigates raters’ sensitivity to those cues. Nonunderstanding episodes (n = 21) and length-matched understanding episodes (n = 21) were taken from a larger dataset of video-recorded conversations between second language (L2) English speakers and a bilingual French-English interlocutor (McDonough, Trofimovich, Dao, & Abashidze, 2018). Episode videos were analyzed for the occurrence of listener visual cues, such as head nods, blinks, facial expressions, and holds. Videos of the listener’s face were manipulated to create three rating conditions: clear voice/clear face, distorted voice/clear face, and clear voice/blurred face. Raters in the same speech community (N = 66) were assigned to a video condition to assess the listener’s comprehension. Results revealed differences in the occurrence of listener visual cues between the understanding and nonunderstanding episodes. In addition, raters gave lower ratings of listener comprehension when they had access to the listener’s visual cues.

Type
Research Report
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2019 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

Funding for this study was provided through a grant awarded to the first two authors by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (435-2105-1206). We would like to thank the research assistant who carried out the communicative tasks with the participants, Dave Dufour, and the RAs who monitored the eye-tracking system, Phung Dao, Malene Bodington, and Emily Sheepy. We also appreciate the hard work of the RAs who designed the rating stimuli and administered the rating tasks, Yang Gao and Ashley Montgomery, and who helped with data transcription and coding: Elissa Allaw, Helene Bramwell, Diana Chojczak, Anne Chretien, Emilie Ladouceur, Rachael Lindberg, Dana Martin, Florina Sylla, and Pakize Uludag.

References

Aoki, H. (2011). Some functions of speaker head nods. In Goodwin, C., LeBaron, C., & Streeck, J. (Eds.), Embodied interaction: Language and body in the material world (pp. 93105). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bavelas, J., Coates, L., & Johnson, T. (2002). Listener responses as collaborative process: The role of gaze. Journal of Communication, 52, 566580. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2002.tb02562.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bavelas, J. B., Black, A., Chovil, N., & Mullett, J. (1990). Truths, lies, and equivocations: The effects of conflicting goals on discourse. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 9, 135161. https://doi.org/10.1177/0261927X9091008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Björkman, B. (2014). An analysis of polyadic English as a lingua franca (ELF) speech: A communicative strategies framework. Journal of Pragmatics, 66, 122138. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2014.03.001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bremer, K. (1996). Causes of understanding problems. In Bremer, K., Roberts, C., Vasseur, M., Simonot, M., & Broeder, P. (Eds.), Achieving understanding: Discourse in intercultural encounters (pp. 3764). London, UK: Longman.Google Scholar
Cogo, A., & Pitzl, M. L. (2016). Pre-empting and signalling non-understanding in ELF. ELT Journal, 70, 339345. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccw015.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dahl, T. I., & Ludvigsen, S. (2014). How I see what you’re saying: The role of gestures in native and foreign language listening comprehension. The Modern Language Journal, 98, 813833. https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davies, M. (2006). Paralinguistic focus on form. TESOL Quarterly, 40, 841855. https://doi.org/10.2307/40264316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Faraco, M., & Kida, T. (2008). Gesture and the negotiation of meaning in a second language classroom. In McCafferty, S. G. & Stam, G. (Eds.), Gesture: Second language acquisition and classroom research (pp. 280297). London, UK: Routledge.Google Scholar
Firth, A. (1996). The discursive accomplishments of normality: On “lingua franca” English and conversation analysis. Journal of Pragmatics, 26, 237259. https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(96)00014-8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Floyd, S., Manrique, E., Rossi, G., & Francisco, T. (2016). Timing of visual bodily behavior in repair sequences: Evidence from three languages. Discourse Processes, 53, 175204. https://doi.org/10.1080/0163853X.2014.992680.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gass, S., & Varonis, E. (1991). Miscommunication in nonnative speaker discourse. In Coupland, N., Giles, H., & Wiemann, J. (Eds.), Miscommunication and problematic talk (pp. 121145). London, UK: Sage.Google Scholar
Goodwin, C. (2003). Pointing as situated practice. In Kita, S. (Ed.), Pointing: Where language, culture and cognition meet (pp. 217241). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Gullberg, M. (2006). Some reasons for studying gesture and second language acquisition. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 44, 103124. https://doi.org/10.1515/IRAL.2006.004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gullberg, M. (2010). Methodological reflections on gesture analysis in second language acquisition and bilingualism research. Second Language Research, 26, 75102. https://doi.org/10.1177/0267658309337639.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gullberg, M., & Holmqvist, K. (1999). Keeping an eye on gestures: Visual perception of gestures in face-to-face communication. Pragmatics and Cognition, 7, 3563. https://doi.org/10.1075/pc.7.1.04gul.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gullberg, M., & Kita, S. (2009). Attention to speech-accompanying gestures: Eye movements and information uptake. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 33, 251277. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10919-009-0073-2.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hoetjes, M., Krahmer, E., & Swerts, M. (2015). On what happens in gesture when communication is unsuccessful. Speech Communication, 72, 160175. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.specom.2015.06.004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holler, J., & Wilkin, K. (2011). An experimental investigation of how addressee feedback affects co-speech gestures accompanying speakers’ responses. Journal of Pragmatics, 43, 35223536. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2011.08.002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, K. (1991). Miscommunication in interpreted classroom interaction. Sign Language Studies, 70, 134. https://doi.org/10.1353/sls.1991.0005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kamiya, N. (2018). The effect of learner age on the interpretation of the nonverbal behaviors of teachers and other students in identifying questions in the L2 classroom. Language Teaching Research, 22, 4764. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168816658303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kaur, J. (2010). Achieving mutual understanding in world Englishes. World Englishes, 29, 192208. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-971X.2010.01638.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kaur, J. (2012). Saying it again: Enhancing clarity in English as a lingua franca (ELF) talk through self repetition. Text and Talk, 32, 593613. https://doi.org/10.1515/text-2012-0028.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kirkpatrick, A. (2007). The communicative strategies of ASEAN speakers of English as a lingua franca. In Prescott, D. (Ed.), English in Southeast Asia: Varieties, literacies and literatures (pp. 118—137). Newcastle, UK: Cambridge Scholars.Google Scholar
Kita, S. (2009). Cross-cultural variation of speech-accompanying gesture: A review. Language and Cognitive Processes, 24, 145167. https://doi.org/10.1080/01690960802586188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Knapp, M. L., Cody, M. J, & Reardon, K. K. (1987). Nonverbal signals. In Berger, C. & Chafee, S. (Eds.), Handbook of communication science (pp. 385418). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Knapp, M. L., Hall, J. A., & Horgan, T. G. (2013). Nonverbal communication in human interaction. Boston, MA: Wadsworth.Google Scholar
Krahmer, E., & Swerts, M. (2005). How children and adults produce and perceive uncertainty in audiovisual speech. Language and Speech, 48, 2953.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Li, S. (2010). The effectiveness of corrective feedback in SLA: A meta-analysis. Language Learning, 60, 309365. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2010.00561.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Long, M. (2007). Problems in SLA. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Lyster, R. (1998). Recasts, repetition, and ambiguity in L2 classroom discourse. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 20, 5181. https://doi.org/10.1017/S027226319800103X.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lyster, R., & Saito, K. (2010). Oral feedback in classroom SLA. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32, 265302. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263109990520.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mackey, A., & Goo, J. (2007). Interaction research in SLA: A meta-analysis and research synthesis. In Mackey, A. (Ed.), Conversational interaction in SLA: A collection of empirical studies (pp. 408452). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Mauranen, A. (2007). Hybrid voices: English as the lingua franca of academics. In Flottum, K. (Ed.), Language and discipline perspectives on academic discourse (pp. 243259). Newcastle, UK: Cambridge Scholars.Google Scholar
McDonough, K., Crowther, D., Kielstra, P., & Trofimovich, P. (2015). Exploring the potential role of eye gaze in eliciting English L2 speakers’ responses to recasts. Second Language Research, 31, 563575. https://doi.org/10.1177/0267658315589656.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McDonough, K., Trofimovich, P., Dao, P., & Abashidze, D. (2018). Eye gaze and L2 speakers’ responses to recasts: A systematic replication study of McDonough, Crowther, Kielstra, and Trofimovich (2015). Language Teaching. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444818000368.Google Scholar
Miller, P. C., & Pan, W. (2012) Recasts in the L2 classroom: A meta-analytic review. International Journal of Educational Research, 56, 4859. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2012.07.002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mohan, B., & Helmer, S. (1988). Context and second language development: Preschoolers’ comprehension of gestures. Applied Linguistics, 9, 275292. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/9.3.275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nakatsukasa, K. (2016). Efficacy of recasts and gestures on the acquisition of locative prepositions. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 38, 771799. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263115000467.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Plonsky, L., & Oswald, F. L. (2014). How big is “big”? Interpreting effect sizes in L2 research. Language Learning, 64, 878912. https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12079.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Plonsky, L., & Gass, S. (2011). Quantitative research methods, study quality, and outcomes: The case of interaction research. Language Learning, 61, 325366. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2011.00640.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Richardson, D. C., & Dale, R. (2005). Looking to understand: The coupling between speakers’ and listeners’ eye movements and its relationship to discourse comprehension. Cognitive Science, 29, 10451060. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog0000_29.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Russell, J., & Spada, N. (2006). The effectiveness of corrective feedback for the acquisition of L2 grammar: A meta-analysis of the research. In Norris, J. & Ortega, L. (Eds.), Synthesizing research on language learning and teaching (pp. 133164). Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Schegloff, E. A. (1997). Practices and actions: Boundary cases of other-initiated repair. Discourse Processes, 23, 499545. https://doi.org/10.1080/01638539709545001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schegloff, E. A. (2007). Sequence organization in interaction: A primer in conversation analysis. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schegloff, E. A., Jefferson, G., & Sacks, H. (1977). The preference for self-correction in the organization of repair in conversation. Language, 53, 361382. https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.1977.0041.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seo, M. S., & Koshik, I. (2010). A conversation analytic study of gestures that engender repair in ESL conversational tutoring. Journal of Pragmatics, 42, 22192239. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2010.01.021.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sueyoshi, A., & Hardison, D. M. (2005). The role of gestures and facial cues in second language listening comprehension. Language Learning, 55, 661699. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0023-8333.2005.00320.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Varonis, E., & Gass, S. (1985). Miscommunication in native/non-native conversation. Language in Society, 14, 327343. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404500011295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wagner, J. (1996). Foreign language acquisition through interaction: A critical review of research on conversational adjustments. Journal of Pragmatics, 26, 215235. https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(96)00013-6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, W., & Loewen, S. (2016). Nonverbal behavior and corrective feedback in nine ESL university-level classrooms. Language Teaching Research, 20, 459478. https://doi.org/0.1177/1362168815577239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2
Cited by

Send article to Kindle

To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

THE OCCURRENCE AND PERCEPTION OF LISTENER VISUAL CUES DURING NONUNDERSTANDING EPISODES
Available formats
×

Send article to Dropbox

To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

THE OCCURRENCE AND PERCEPTION OF LISTENER VISUAL CUES DURING NONUNDERSTANDING EPISODES
Available formats
×

Send article to Google Drive

To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

THE OCCURRENCE AND PERCEPTION OF LISTENER VISUAL CUES DURING NONUNDERSTANDING EPISODES
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *