11
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Audience Design through Social Interaction during Group Discussion

      research-article
      , * ,
      PLoS ONE
      Public Library of Science

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          This paper contrasts two accounts of audience design during multiparty communication: audience design as a strategic individual-level message adjustment or as a non-strategic interaction-level message adjustment. Using a non-interactive communication task, Experiment 1 showed that people distinguish between messages designed for oneself and messages designed for another person; consistent with strategic message design, messages designed for another person/s were longer (number of words) than those designed for oneself. However, audience size did not affect message length (messages designed for different sized audiences were similar in length). Using an interactive communication task Experiment 2 showed that as group size increased so too did communicative effort (number of words exchanged between interlocutors). Consistent with a non-strategic account, as group members were added more social interaction was necessary to coordinate the group's collective situation model. Experiment 3 validates and extends the production measures used in Experiment 1 and 2 using a comprehension task. Taken together, our results indicate that audience design arises as a non-strategic outcome of social interaction during group discussion.

          Related collections

          Most cited references5

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Foundations of representation: where might graphical symbol systems come from?

          It has been suggested that iconic graphical signs evolve into symbolic graphical signs through repeated usage. This article reports a series of interactive graphical communication experiments using a 'pictionary' task to establish the conditions under which the evolution might occur. Experiment 1 rules out a simple repetition based account in favor of an account that requires feedback and interaction between communicators. Experiment 2 shows how the degree of interaction affects the evolution of signs according to a process of grounding. Experiment 3 confirms the prediction that those not involved directly in the interaction have trouble interpreting the graphical signs produced in Experiment 1. On the basis of these results, this article argues that icons evolve into symbols as a consequence of the systematic shift in the locus of information from the sign to the users' memory of the sign's usage supported by an interactive grounding process. 2007 Cognitive Science Society, Inc.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Referring as a collaborative process.

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Group discussion as interactive dialogue or as serial monologue: the influence of group size.

              Current models draw a broad distinction between communication as dialogue and communication as monologue. The two kinds of models have different implications for who influences whom in a group discussion. If the discussion is like interactive dialogue, group members should be influenced most by those with whom they interact in the discussion; if it is like serial monologue, they should be influenced most by the dominant speaker. The experiments reported here show that in small, 5-person groups, the communication is like dialogue and members are influenced most by those with whom they interact in the discussion. However, in large, 10-person groups, the communication is like monologue and members are influenced most by the dominant speaker. The difference in mode of communication is explained in terms of how speakers in the two sizes of groups design their utterances for different audiences.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Role: Editor
                Journal
                PLoS One
                PLoS ONE
                plos
                plosone
                PLoS ONE
                Public Library of Science (San Francisco, USA )
                1932-6203
                2013
                21 February 2013
                : 8
                : 2
                : e57211
                Affiliations
                [1]School of Psychology, University of Western Australia, Perth, Western Australia, Australia
                University of Lausanne, Switzerland
                Author notes

                Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

                Conceived and designed the experiments: SLR NF MM. Performed the experiments: SLR. Analyzed the data: SLR NF. Wrote the paper: NF SLR.

                Article
                PONE-D-12-21946
                10.1371/journal.pone.0057211
                3578794
                23437343
                04820c32-752a-4a58-9b0e-e5ab95a713f4
                Copyright @ 2013

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

                History
                : 22 July 2012
                : 22 January 2013
                Page count
                Pages: 7
                Funding
                Funding provided by an ARC Discovery grant DP120104237 ( http://www.arc.gov.au/). The funder had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
                Categories
                Research Article
                Social and Behavioral Sciences
                Communications
                Natural Language
                Information Science
                Psychology
                Behavior
                Human Performance
                Verbal Behavior
                Experimental Psychology
                Social Psychology

                Uncategorized
                Uncategorized

                Comments

                Comment on this article