Article1982

Listener responsiveness and the coordination of conversation.

190 citations0/0 files storedJournal of Personality and Social Psychology

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Language, Discourse, Communication Strategies Patient-Provider Communication in Healthcare Attachment and Relationship Dynamics

Abstract

Listeners are often active in conversation, and the feedback they provide speakers can improve the communication. To examine how feedback influences conversation, we had 76 speaker subjects watch a movie and then summarize it to one or two listeners. The- listeners provided varying amounts of feedback to the speaker. When two listeners were present, one could influence the speaker through feedback and the other could only eavesdrop on the conversation. When speakers received more feedback, their narratives were more comprehensible; that is, both listeners understood the movie better. In addition, feedback individuated communication; that is, the listener who provided the feedback understood the movie better than the eavesdropper who listened to the same conversation. In part, feedback produced these effects by coordinating what the speaker said with what the listener needed to know. Listener feedback signaled listeners ' prior knowledge of the movie, and speakers talked most efficiently about those sections of the movie about which listeners had prior knowledge. Traditional research on communication has often proceeded as if the variables affecting it were static and nonemergent, in the sense that most variables do not change during the course of the conversation and that changes that do occur are produced by something other than dynamic interaction between the participants. For example, work on attitude change has studied static characteristics of the source, message, and recipient (McGuire, 1969). Work in nonverbal communication, with a few notable exceptions (e.g., Goffman, 1971), also typically focuses on these characteristics by looking at personality differences (e.g., Rosenthal, Hall,

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 190 citations exist upstream.

References

2015Mind, Self, and Society 1978Facial Action Coding System 1981Definite reference and mutual knowledge 1979Sensitivity to Nonverbal Communication: The PONS Test 1998Getting a Word in Edgewise:1974On the structure of speaker–auditor interaction during speaking turns 1966Concurrent feedback, confirmation, and the encoding of referents in verbal communication.1964Changes in reference phrases as a function of frequency of usage in social interaction: a preliminary study

Cited by

1991The Equalization Phenomenon: Status Effects in Computer-Mediated and Face-to-Face Decision-Making Groups 1998Retrieval processes in transactive memory systems.2009Joint Action, Interactive Alignment, and Dialog 1991Perspective-Taking in Communication: Representations of Others' Knowledge in Reference 1992Coordination of knowledge in communication: Effects of speakers' assumptions about what others know.2017Does team communication represent a one-size-fits-all approach?: A meta-analysis of team communication and performance

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.