Basics of Intersubjectivity Dynamics: Model of Synchrony Emergence When Dialogue Partners Understand Each Other

Since Condon’s annotations of videotaped interactions in 1966, an increasing amount of studies points the crucial role of non-verbal behaviours in communication. Among others, synchrony between interactants is claimed to be an evidence of the interaction quality: to give to humans a feeling of natural dialogue, agents must be able to react on appropriate time. Recent dynamical models propose that synchrony emerges from the coupling between interactants. We propose here, and test in simulation, a model of verbal communication which links the mutual understanding of dialogue partners to the emergence of synchrony between their non-verbal behaviours: if interactants understand each other, synchrony emerges; if they do not understand, synchrony is disrupted. In addition to propose and test a model explaining the link between synchrony and interaction quality (synchrony accounts for mutual understanding and good interaction, di-synchrony accounts for misunderstanding) our tests point the fact that synchronisation and di-synchronisation emerging from mutual understanding are fast phenomenons: agents have a quick answer to whether they understand each other or not.

[1]  Jürgen Kurths,et al.  Synchronization - A Universal Concept in Nonlinear Sciences , 2001, Cambridge Nonlinear Science Series.

[2]  Line Garnero,et al.  Inter-Brain Synchronization during Social Interaction , 2010, PloS one.

[3]  D. Matsumoto,et al.  Spontaneous facial expressions of emotion of congenitally and noncongenitally blind individuals. , 2009, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[4]  M. Auvray,et al.  Perceptual interactions in a minimalist virtual environment , 2009 .

[5]  Ken Prepin,et al.  Human–machine interaction as a model of machine–machine interaction: how to make machines interact as humans do , 2007, Adv. Robotics.

[6]  A. Kendon Conducting Interaction: Patterns of Behavior in Focused Encounters , 1990 .

[7]  William S. Condon,et al.  An Analysis of Behavioral Organization , 2013 .

[8]  M. LaFrance Nonverbal synchrony and rapport: Analysis by the cross-lag panel technique. , 1979 .

[9]  M. Rohde,et al.  Sensitivity to social contingency or stability of interaction? Modelling the dynamics of perceptual crossing , 2008 .

[10]  Jürgen Kurths,et al.  Synchronization: Phase locking and frequency entrainment , 2001 .

[11]  Philippe Gaussier,et al.  Neural networks for complex scene recognition: simulation of a visual system with several cortical areas , 1992, [Proceedings 1992] IJCNN International Joint Conference on Neural Networks.

[12]  Jacqueline Nadel,et al.  Reading sadness beyond human faces , 2010, Brain Research.

[13]  T. Brazelton,et al.  The infant's response to entrapment between contradictory messages in face-to-face interaction. , 1978, Journal of the American Academy of Child Psychiatry.

[14]  S. Duncan,et al.  Some Signals and Rules for Taking Speaking Turns in Conversations , 1972 .

[15]  V. Yngve On getting a word in edgewise , 1970 .

[16]  Catherine Pelachaud,et al.  Modelling multimodal expression of emotion in a virtual agent , 2009, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[17]  Philippe Gaussier,et al.  Avoiding the world model trap: An acting robot does not need to be so smart! , 1994 .

[18]  J. Nadel,et al.  Human brain spots emotion in non humanoid robots. , 2011, Social cognitive and affective neuroscience.

[19]  W. S. Condon,et al.  SOUND FILM ANALYSIS OF NORMAL AND PATHOLOGICAL BEHAVIOR PATTERNS , 1966, The Journal of nervous and mental disease.

[20]  Philippe Gaussier,et al.  How an Agent Can Detect and Use Synchrony Parameter of Its Own Interaction with a Human? , 2009, COST 2102 Training School.

[21]  Catherine Pelachaud,et al.  Emotional Meaning and Expression in Animated Faces , 1999, IWAI.

[22]  Frank J. Bernieri,et al.  Coordinated movement and rapport in teacher-student interactions , 1988 .