Multimodal language in child-directed versus adult-directed speech
dc.authorscopusid | 57730179200 | |
dc.authorscopusid | 57209003778 | |
dc.authorscopusid | 56033129600 | |
dc.contributor.author | Özer, Demet | |
dc.contributor.author | Özer,D. | |
dc.contributor.author | Aktan-Erciyes,A. | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2024-10-15T19:42:44Z | |
dc.date.available | 2024-10-15T19:42:44Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2024 | |
dc.department | Kadir Has University | en_US |
dc.department-temp | Kandemir S., Kadir Has University, Istanbul, Turkey; Özer D., Kadir Has University, Istanbul, Turkey; Aktan-Erciyes A., Kadir Has University, Istanbul, Turkey | en_US |
dc.description.abstract | Speakers design their multimodal communication according to the needs and knowledge of their interlocutors, phenomenon known as audience design. We use more sophisticated language (e.g., longer sentences with complex grammatical forms) when communicating with adults compared with children. This study investigates how speech and co-speech gestures change in adult-directed speech (ADS) versus child-directed speech (CDS) for three different tasks. Overall, 66 adult participants (Mage = 21.05, 60 female) completed three different tasks (story-reading, storytelling and address description) and they were instructed to pretend to communicate with a child (CDS) or an adult (ADS). We hypothesised that participants would use more complex language, more beat gestures, and less iconic gestures in the ADS compared with the CDS. Results showed that, for CDS, participants used more iconic gestures in the story-reading task and storytelling task compared with ADS. However, participants used more beat gestures in the storytelling task for ADS than CDS. In addition, language complexity did not differ across conditions. Our findings indicate that how speakers employ different types of gestures (iconic vs beat) according to the addressee’s needs and across different tasks. Speakers might prefer to use more iconic gestures with children than adults. Results are discussed according to audience design theory. © Experimental Psychology Society 2023. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citation | 0 | |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.1177/17470218231188832 | |
dc.identifier.endpage | 728 | en_US |
dc.identifier.issn | 1747-0218 | |
dc.identifier.issue | 4 | en_US |
dc.identifier.pmid | 37417537 | |
dc.identifier.scopus | 2-s2.0-85175102591 | |
dc.identifier.scopusquality | Q3 | |
dc.identifier.startpage | 716 | en_US |
dc.identifier.uri | https://doi.org/10.1177/17470218231188832 | |
dc.identifier.uri | https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12469/6583 | |
dc.identifier.volume | 77 | en_US |
dc.identifier.wosquality | Q3 | |
dc.language.iso | en | en_US |
dc.publisher | SAGE Publications Ltd | en_US |
dc.relation.ispartof | Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology | en_US |
dc.relation.publicationcategory | Makale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanı | en_US |
dc.rights | info:eu-repo/semantics/closedAccess | en_US |
dc.subject | adult-directed speech | en_US |
dc.subject | Audience design | en_US |
dc.subject | child-directed speech | en_US |
dc.subject | multimodal language | en_US |
dc.title | Multimodal language in child-directed versus adult-directed speech | en_US |
dc.type | Article | en_US |
dspace.entity.type | Publication | |
relation.isAuthorOfPublication | 48189ebf-67ef-4e36-aac8-9fe249598954 | |
relation.isAuthorOfPublication.latestForDiscovery | 48189ebf-67ef-4e36-aac8-9fe249598954 |