Journal of Language and Social Psychology

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Free Access - Register Here

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Stephens, J.
Right arrow Articles by Beattie, G.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Journal of Language and Social Psychology, Vol. 5, No. 2, 119-134 (1986)
DOI: 10.1177/0261927X8652003

On Judging the Ends of Speaker Turns in Conversation

Jane Stephens

Geoffrey Beattie

University of Sheffield, Department of Psychology.

This study sought to determine if subjects could discriminate turn-final and turn-medial utterances taken from different types of natural conversation and presented out of context. The main aim of the study was to see if subjects could make this distinction when presented with either an audio recording of the utterances, thus testing the role of prosody, paralanguage plus syntax and semantics in the turn-taking process, or a typescript of the utterances which served to control for the effects of syntax and semantics. The study also investigated whether perceived drawl was associated with turn endings and if judgements about the apparent presence of drawl on the final or stressed syllable of the terminal clause correlated with the ability to distinguish turn-final and turn-medial utterances. The study revealed that subjects could discriminate tum-final and turn-medial utterances but only when presented with an audio recording of the samples and in addition when these samples were taken from conversations involving disagreement (but not from those conversations involving agreement). Subjects were found not to distinguish turn-final and turn-medial utterances in terms of the perception of drawl, when the extracts were presented in random order, but they could do this when the extracts from each individual speaker were presented consecutively. The perceived presence of drawl did not, however, seem to correlate with the judgement of the completion to turns. The results demonstrate the importance of prosodic and paralinguistic elements in the regulation of speaker turns in conversation.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?