In this paper, I argue that gaze behavior in multiparty interaction is essential for addressee selection and for next-speaker selection by current speaker. The two conversational tasks are related, but – at least in longer turns – not identical and should be distinguished analytically. In multiparty interaction, addressee selection by gaze is a non-trivial issue, as most bodily arrangements make it hard or impossible for the current speaker to look at all (intended) addressees at the same time. As a solution to this problem, current speakers alternatingly look at the co-participants they want to address. For the selection of a next speaker, only the current speaker's gaze during the last phase of the turn is relevant.
Bavelas, J. B., Coates, L. & Johnson, T. (2002). Listener responses as a collaborative process: The role of gaze. Journal of Communication, 52, 566–580.
Clark, H. H. & Carlson, T. B. (1982). Hearers and speech acts. Language, 58, 332–373.
De Ruiter, J. P. (2007). Some multimodal signals in humans. In I. Van de Sluis, M. Theune, E. Reiter, & E. Krahmer (Eds.), Proceedings of the Workshop on Multimodal Output Generation (MOG 2007), 141–148.
Gibson, D. R. (2003). Participation shifts: order and differentiation in group conversation. Social Forces, 81(4), 1335–1381.
Goffman, E. (1981). Footing. In: E. Goffman, Forms of Talk (pp.124–159). Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
Goodwin, C. (1981). Conversational Organization: Interaction between Speakers and Hearers. New York etc.: Academic Press.
Holler, J. & Kendrick, K. (2015). ‘Unaddressed participants’ gaze in multi-person interaction: Optimizing recipiency. Frontiers in Psychology, 6 (98). .
Kalma, A. (1992). Gazing in triads: a powerful signal in floor apportionment. British Journal of Social Psychology 31(1), 21–39.
Kendon, A. (1967). Some functions of gaze direction in social interaction. Acta Psychologica 26, 22–63.
Kendon, A. (1973). The role of visible behavior in the organization of social interaction. In: M. Cranach & I. Vine (Eds.), Social Communication and Movement: Studies of Interaction and Expression in Man and Chimpanzee (pp29–74). New York: Academic Press.
Kidwell, M. (1997). Demonstrating recipiency: knowledge displays as a resource for the unaddressed participant. Applied Linguistics 8(2), 85–96.
Lerner, G. (2003). Selecting next speaker: The context sensitive operation of a context-free organization. Language in Society 32, 177–201.
Rossano, F. (2012). Gaze behavior in face-to-face interaction. PhD MPI Psycholinguistics, Nijmegen.
Rossano, F. (2013). Gaze in conversation. In J. Sidnell & T. Stivers (Eds.), The Handbook of Conversation Analysis (pp.308–329). Hoboken: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
Rossano, F., Brown, P., & Levinson, S. C. (2009). Gaze, questioning and culture. In: J. Sidnell (Ed.), Conversation Analysis: Comparative Perspectives (pp.187–249). Cambridge: CUP.
Sacks, H., Schegloff, E. A., & Jefferson, G. (1974). A simplest systematics for the organization of turn taking for conversation. Language 50(4), 696–735.
Sacks, H., & Schegloff, Emanuel A. (1979). Two preferences in the organization of reference to persons in conversation and their interaction. In Psathas, G. (Ed.), Everyday Language (pp.15–21). New York: Academic Press.
Selting, M.et al. (2011). A system for transcribing talk-in-interaction: GAT 2. Gesprächsforschung 12, 1–51.
Stivers, T. & Rossano, F. (2010). Mobilizing response. Research on Language and Social Interaction 43(1), 3–31.
Stivers, T. (2015). Conversation is built for two. Paper presented at 14th IPrA, University of Antwerp, Belgium.
Streeck, J. (2014). Mutual gaze and recognition: Revisiting Kendon’s ‘Gaze direction in two-person interaction’. In M. Seyfeddinipur & M. Gullberg (Eds.), From Gesture in Conversation to Gesture as Visible Utterance: Essays in Honor of Adam Kendon (pp.35.55). Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Tiitinen, S. & Ruusuvuori, J. (2012). Engaging parents through gaze: speaker selection in three-party interactions in maternity clinics. Patient Education and counseling 89(1), 38–43.
Vertegaal, R., Slagter, R., van der Veer, G., & Nijholt, A. (2001). Eye gaze patterns in conversation: There is more to conversational agents than meets the eyes. Proc. SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems 3(1), 301–308.
Cited by (24)
Cited by 24 other publications
Ben-Moshe, Yotam M. & Yael Maschler
2024. Request for confirmation sequences in Hebrew. Open Linguistics 10:1
Blythe, Joe, Fakry Hamdani & Scott Barnes
2024. Tactile engagement of prospective next speakers in Indonesian multiparty conversations. Language in Society 53:4 ► pp. 671 ff.
Kadota, Keisuke, Seima Oyama & Yasuharu Den
2024. 2024 27th Conference of the Oriental COCOSDA International Committee for the Co-ordination and Standardisation of Speech Databases and Assessment Techniques (O-COCOSDA), ► pp. 1 ff.
2024. Behavioral Intervention for Adults With Autism on Distribution of Attention in Triadic Conversations: A/B-Tested Pre-Post Study. JMIR Formative Research 8 ► pp. e55339 ff.
Lee, Meng-Chen, Mai Trinh & Zhigang Deng
2023. INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON MULTIMODAL INTERACTION, ► pp. 436 ff.
Nishizaka, Aug
2023. Doing inspecting in interaction: seeing the physiognomy of an object. Mind, Culture, and Activity 30:2 ► pp. 169 ff.
Rühlemann, Christoph & Alexander Ptak
2023. Reaching beneath the tip of the iceberg: A guide to the Freiburg Multimodal Interaction Corpus. Open Linguistics 9:1
2021. Turn-allocation and gaze: A multimodal revision of the “current-speaker-selects-next” rule of the turn-taking system of conversation analysis. Discourse Studies 23:2 ► pp. 117 ff.
2021. Who is Asked and Who Gets to Answer the Health-Care Practitioner’s Questions When Patients with Intellectual Disabilities Attend UK General Practice Health Checks with Their Companions?. Health Communication 36:4 ► pp. 487 ff.
Degutyte, Ziedune & Arlene Astell
2021. The Role of Eye Gaze in Regulating Turn Taking in Conversations: A Systematized Review of Methods and Findings. Frontiers in Psychology 12
Auer, Peter, Angelika Bauer & Ina Hörmeyer
2020. How Can the ‘Autonomous Speaker’ Survive in Atypical Interaction? The Case of Anarthria and Aphasia. In Atypical Interaction, ► pp. 373 ff.
Bateman, Amanda
2020. Young children’s affective stance through embodied displays of emotion during tellings. Text & Talk 40:5 ► pp. 643 ff.
Dale, Rick, Gregory A. Bryant, Joseph H. Manson & Matthew M. Gervais
2020. Body synchrony in triadic interaction. Royal Society Open Science 7:9
Zima, Elisabeth
2020. Gaze and Recipient Feedback in Triadic Storytelling Activities. Discourse Processes 57:9 ► pp. 725 ff.
Vranjes, Jelena, Hanneke Bot, Kurt Feyaerts & Geert Brône
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 11 january 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers.
Any errors therein should be reported to them.