Fourteen visibility experiments, which compared the overall rate of gesturing when participants could or could not see each other, have produced perfectly contradictory results: Seven found a significantly higher overall gesture rate in... more
Fourteen visibility experiments, which compared the overall rate of gesturing when participants could or could not see each other, have produced perfectly contradictory results: Seven found a significantly higher overall gesture rate in the visible condition, and seven found no significant difference. Experiments that used quasi-dialogues in which the addressees’ responses were experimentally constrained (e.g., using a confederate) found a significant difference; the experiments that used free dialogues did not. This review examined three possible explanations and found that (1) the use of quasi-dialogues did not ensure better experimental control, (2) the constrained addressees may have introduced a confound that could account for the significant difference, and (3) although mutual visibility did not affect the overall gesture rate in free dialogues, it significantly increased more specific features of gestures that are useful to addressees. These findings raise several issues about the utility of conventional visibility designs for understanding conversational gestures.
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
This research continues in the line of several previous studies in the micro-analysis of therapy dialogues that are making the abstract tenets of social constructionism directly observable. Here, we report the design and results of a... more
This research continues in the line of several previous studies in the micro-analysis of therapy dialogues that are making the abstract tenets of social constructionism directly observable. Here, we report the design and results of a microanalysis of calibration sequences in a therapy dialogue focused on a client's preferred future. This study makes observable how the therapist and client display their understanding to each other moment by moment in their miracle question conversation and tracks what content (i.e., meanings or understandings) are being co-constructed and accumulated utterance by utterance in their interaction. Implications for social constructionism, psychotherapy dialogues generally, future research, and practice effectiveness are discussed.
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
This research continues in the line of several previous studies in the micro-analysis of therapy dialogues that are making the abstract tenets of social constructionism directly observable. Here, we report the design and results of a... more
This research continues in the line of several previous studies in the micro-analysis of therapy dialogues that are making the abstract tenets of social constructionism directly observable. Here, we report the design and results of a microanalysis of calibration sequences in a therapy dialogue focused on a client's preferred future. This study makes observable how the therapist and client display their understanding to each other moment by moment in their miracle question conversation and tracks what content (i.e., meanings or understandings) are being co-constructed and accumulated utterance by utterance in their interaction. Implications for social constructionism, psychotherapy dialogues generally, future research, and practice effectiveness are discussed.
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Fourteen visibility experiments, which compared the overall rate of gesturing when participants could or could not see each other, have produced perfectly contradictory results: Seven found a significantly higher overall gesture rate in... more
Fourteen visibility experiments, which compared the overall rate of gesturing when participants could or could not see each other, have produced perfectly contradictory results: Seven found a significantly higher overall gesture rate in the visible condition, and seven found no significant difference. Experiments that used quasi-dialogues in which the addressees’ responses were experimentally constrained (e.g., using a confederate) found a significant difference; the experiments that used free dialogues did not. This review examined three possible explanations and found that (1) the use of quasi-dialogues did not ensure better experimental control, (2) the constrained addressees may have introduced a confound that could account for the significant difference, and (3) although mutual visibility did not affect the overall gesture rate in free dialogues, it significantly increased more specific features of gestures that are useful to addressees. These findings raise several issues abou...