Backchannels and other Listener Actions in Argumentative Dialogue Dirk Heylen

DEFINITIONS

Persuasion is a communicative process Without communication persuasion is impossible Wayne Thompson: The Process of Persuasion. Principles and Readings

Persuasion as a minimum requires two persons (or one if one considers self-deliberation an instance of persuasion) with either the one intending to influence the second or each of the two attempting to affect the attitudes, beliefs, or actions of the other.

The means for these attempts are verbal and nonverbal messages, which the one participant devises, encodes, and transmits and which the other attends to and decodes.

Communication as a minimum requires two persons with either the one intending to influence the second or each of the two attempting to affect the attitudes, beliefs, or actions of the other.

Communication is a persuasive process Without persuasion communication is impossible Dirk Heylen: The Process of Communication. Principles and Readings

In this talk we will report on the various strands of research 1-4 mentioned next and on the way they combine together.

1.Definition of an annotation schema for argumentative discourse 2.Definition of an annotation schema for emotions and other mental states 3.Annotation of meetings with an extended dialogue act schema and an analysis of the non-verbal behaviours that characterize speaker and listener actions 4.Refinement of theoretical models for joint actions and backchanneling

… and how they combine together

To answer the question in meetings: what was decided what were the arguments in favour or against who was in favour or against who persuaded whom and how we need to know more about: how argumentation in meetings work what kinds of argumentative acts realised as sequences of D.A.s using particular behaviours/signs what kinds of reactions people display

Communication as a minimum requires two persons with each of the two attempting to affect the attitudes, beliefs, or actions of the other.

Every speech act is a proposal for a (joint) project: question, offer, answer, promise attempt to persuade… think of illocution / perlocution

By performing an illocutionary act [such as sit down please] I am proposing, suggesting, posing, or putting forward a project for us to carry out jointly – namely, that I get you to sit down. Now getting you to sit down is another thing I can’t do by myself. It is a joint action that I am projecting for the two of us to do, and that requires us to coordinate our actions. I will call this joint action a joint project. Joint projects have two parts: the speaker proposes a joint project and the addressees take it up. [Clark, p. 150]

Communicative actions are joint actions joint(A proposes joint project w to B, B considers A’s proposal of w) Herbert Clark: Using Language

Several levels 1.A executes behaviour t for B to perceive 2.A presents signal s to B 3.A signals to B that p [meaning] 4.A proposes joint project w to B 1)B attends perceptually to behaviour t from A 2)B identifies signal s from A 3)B recognizes that A means that p 4)B considers A’s proposal of w

Principles and Processes Semiotic processes Closure on all actions Conversational Maxims –be to the point –be short –be accurate

Semiotic processes From symptom to symbol Behavioural Intentional communication –you look at me to see me –you notice that I see you looking –you know that I may be wondering why you are looking –you keep looking –what do you want from me

Closure People need closure on all their actions. Conversational actions are joined and directed towards the other. Each interactant needs the other to tell whether he was succesful in his actions. Actions on each level have to receive closure.

Clark distinguishes two line of talk in conversations. The primary track is concerned with “official business”. The second track concerns talk (or elements of talk) in the background: talk about communication itself. The communicative acts in track 2 are used for managing conversation at all four levels of action. When people nod, smile, or say “uh huh” during another’s utterance, they are saying “I understand you so far”, a signal in track 2 to help achieve closure at level 3.

Levels on track 2 1.A executes backchannel t for B to perceive 2.A presents signal s to B 3.A signals to B that p [meaning] 4.A proposes joint project w to B 1)B attends perceptually to behaviour t from A 2)B identifies signal s from A 3)B recognizes that A means that p 4)B considers A’s proposal of w

Minimal effort Implicitness … Unmarked Listener: –if I attend to you, my attentional behaviour should be enough to signal to you that I am attending; –if nothing else you may infer that I am understanding … agreeing with what you are saying Speaker: –if I see some attentional behaviour from you, I assume you are attending –if nothing else, I assume you are understanding… In case of doubt…: more explicit signal or request

Because of “default” case: a basic coordination behaviour works on all levels uh-huh :: I can hear you, I understand you, I agree with you

Because of “default” case: a basic coordination behaviour works on all levels gaze :: I can see you, [symptom/symbol] I can follow what you do, I will do what you want me to do

Conversational actions are split into parts and roles alternate. This calls for synchronisation. Participants need to announce the beginning and end of each phase.

1 behaveattendrequest attention signal attention 2 presentation of signal recognize as signal request recognition signal recognition 3 signal meaningunderstandrequest understanding signal understanding 4 propose project consider project request consideration signal consideration

1 behave indicate speakerhood attendrequest attentionsignal attention indicate addresseehood display attentiveness 2 presentation of signal recognize as signal request recognitionsignal recognition 3 signal meaningunderstandrequest understanding signal understanding 4 propose projectconsider projectrequest consideration signal consideration

(back to main business) Argumentation (part of persuasion) How do people signal that they have been persuaded? How do people avoid signalling that they have been persuaded if they are not? Note: persuasion is communication communication is persuasion

CORPUS

In AMI data: Almost no emotion (unfortunately?) subtlety Argumentation, Persuasion, Interaction Beliefs, Attitudes, Goals Social Psychology –rewards –interpersonal attitudes –social emotions (a bit)

In AMI data: Almost no emotion (unfortunately?) Facial Expressions / other forms of NVC Symbolic expressions “(non-speech)-acts” Signalling –understanding –assessment: good or bad proposal convincing

Communicativ e act FacePosture Hand/Arm gestures Head movements PauseneutralNeutralGesturing stops StallingThinking face uncertain Turn to addressee Iconic gsturs, rotation movements, self touching Waggle Error signalling Guilty faceNeutralGesticulation stops Lowering head RetractionNeutral Gesturing stops. Retract to neutral. Neutral Completion elicitation Uncertainty Iconic gestures, rotation movements Self- correction Neutral Hand gstrs stop. Retract to neutrl CompletionNeutralLean forwardHand gestures start Correct misspeakin g Surprise Puzzled Lean forwardRaise hand or finger Gesturing starts Frequent head shakes

Possible conclusion To study persuasion in communication one should not forget to take into account the contributions in the background persuasion = joint action closure = assessment on all levels backchannels have impact on message / strategy {both within and across terms}

work in progress data analysis improving analysis methods conversational agents / dialogue model simulation

Aims Understanding human interactional behaviour Building assistants that can help to improve the efficiency of the meeting For instance by a boycot of Dominators

Automatic detection of dominance Influence diffusion Speaking time in seconds Number of turns in meeting Times addressed Successful interruptions Number of floorgrabbers Number of questions asked Number of times interrupted Number of words spoken in the meeting

Top five 1.Number of floor grabbers 2.Number of turns 3.Number of succesful interruptions 4.Number of words 5.Number of questions asked

Best performance (SVM) Number of floor grabbers Number of turns 75%