Purpose: This study aims to further our understanding of prosodic entrainment and its different subtypes by analyzing a single corpus of conversations with 12 different methods and comparing the subsequent results.Method: Entrainment on three fundamental frequency features was analyzed in a subset of recordings from the LUCID corpus (Baker & Hazan, 2011) using the following methods: global proximity, global convergence, local proximity, local ear mixed-effects models (Schweitzer & Lewandowski, 2013), geometric approach (Lehnert-LeHouillier, Terrazas, & Sandoval, 2020), time-aligned moving average (Kousidis et al., 2008), HYBRID method (De Looze et al., 2014), crossrecurrence quantification analysis (e.g., Fusaroli & Tylen, 2016), and windowed, lagged cross-correlation (Boker et al., 2002). We employed entrainment measures on a local timescale (i.e., on adjacent utterances), a global timescale (i.e., over larger time frames), and a time series-based timescale that is larger than adjacent utterances but smaller than entire conversations.Results: We observed variance in results of different methods.Conclusions: Results suggest that each method may measure a slightly different type of entrainment. The complex implications this has for existing and future research are discussed.

Measuring Prosodic Entrainment in Conversation: A Review and Comparison of Different Methods

de Jong, Dorina
Secondo
;
D'Ausilio, Alessandro
Penultimo
;
2023

Abstract

Purpose: This study aims to further our understanding of prosodic entrainment and its different subtypes by analyzing a single corpus of conversations with 12 different methods and comparing the subsequent results.Method: Entrainment on three fundamental frequency features was analyzed in a subset of recordings from the LUCID corpus (Baker & Hazan, 2011) using the following methods: global proximity, global convergence, local proximity, local ear mixed-effects models (Schweitzer & Lewandowski, 2013), geometric approach (Lehnert-LeHouillier, Terrazas, & Sandoval, 2020), time-aligned moving average (Kousidis et al., 2008), HYBRID method (De Looze et al., 2014), crossrecurrence quantification analysis (e.g., Fusaroli & Tylen, 2016), and windowed, lagged cross-correlation (Boker et al., 2002). We employed entrainment measures on a local timescale (i.e., on adjacent utterances), a global timescale (i.e., over larger time frames), and a time series-based timescale that is larger than adjacent utterances but smaller than entire conversations.Results: We observed variance in results of different methods.Conclusions: Results suggest that each method may measure a slightly different type of entrainment. The complex implications this has for existing and future research are discussed.
2023
Kruyt, Joanna; de Jong, Dorina; D'Ausilio, Alessandro; Beňuš, Štefan
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
2023-JSLHR.pdf

accesso aperto

Descrizione: versione editoriale
Tipologia: Full text (versione editoriale)
Licenza: Creative commons
Dimensione 793.43 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
793.43 kB Adobe PDF Visualizza/Apri

I documenti in SFERA sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11392/2561853
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 0
  • Scopus 2
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 0
social impact