'Should we laugh?' Acoustic features of (in)voluntary laughters in spontaneous conversations.

IF 1.7 4区 心理学 Q3 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL Cognitive Processing Pub Date : 2024-02-01 Epub Date: 2023-11-23 DOI:10.1007/s10339-023-01168-8
Valéria Krepsz, Viktória Horváth, Anna Huszár, Tilda Neuberger, Dorottya Gyarmathy
{"title":"'Should we laugh?' Acoustic features of (in)voluntary laughters in spontaneous conversations.","authors":"Valéria Krepsz, Viktória Horváth, Anna Huszár, Tilda Neuberger, Dorottya Gyarmathy","doi":"10.1007/s10339-023-01168-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Laughter is one of the most common non-verbal features; however, contrary to the previous assumptions, it may also act as signals of bonding, affection, emotional regulation agreement or empathy (Scott et al. Trends Cogn Sci 18:618-620, 2014). Although previous research agrees that laughter does not form a uniform group in many respects, different types of laughter have been defined differently by individual research. Due to the various definitions of laughter, as well as their different methodologies, the results of the previous examinations were often contradictory. The analysed laughs were often recorded in controlled, artificial situations; however, less is known about laughs from social conversations. Thus, the aim of the present study is to examine the acoustic realisation, as well as the automatic classification of laughter that appear in human interactions according to whether listeners consider them to be voluntary or involuntary. The study consists of three parts using a multi-method approach. Firstly, in the perception task, participants had to decide whether the given laughter seemed to be rather involuntary or voluntary. In the second part of the experiment, those sound samples of laughter were analysed that were considered to be voluntary or involuntary by at least 66.6% of listeners. In the third part, all the sound samples were grouped into the two categories by an automatic classifier. The results showed that listeners were able to distinguish laughter extracted from spontaneous conversation into two different types, as well as the distinction was possible on the basis of the automatic classification. In addition, there were significant differences in acoustic parameters between the two groups of laughter. The results of the research showed that, although the distinction between voluntary and involuntary laughter categories appears based on the analysis of everyday, spontaneous conversations in terms of the perception and acoustic features, there is often an overlap in the acoustic features of voluntary and involuntary laughter. The results will enrich our previous knowledge of laughter and help to describe and explore the diversity of non-verbal vocalisations.</p>","PeriodicalId":47638,"journal":{"name":"Cognitive Processing","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10828014/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cognitive Processing","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10339-023-01168-8","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/11/23 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Laughter is one of the most common non-verbal features; however, contrary to the previous assumptions, it may also act as signals of bonding, affection, emotional regulation agreement or empathy (Scott et al. Trends Cogn Sci 18:618-620, 2014). Although previous research agrees that laughter does not form a uniform group in many respects, different types of laughter have been defined differently by individual research. Due to the various definitions of laughter, as well as their different methodologies, the results of the previous examinations were often contradictory. The analysed laughs were often recorded in controlled, artificial situations; however, less is known about laughs from social conversations. Thus, the aim of the present study is to examine the acoustic realisation, as well as the automatic classification of laughter that appear in human interactions according to whether listeners consider them to be voluntary or involuntary. The study consists of three parts using a multi-method approach. Firstly, in the perception task, participants had to decide whether the given laughter seemed to be rather involuntary or voluntary. In the second part of the experiment, those sound samples of laughter were analysed that were considered to be voluntary or involuntary by at least 66.6% of listeners. In the third part, all the sound samples were grouped into the two categories by an automatic classifier. The results showed that listeners were able to distinguish laughter extracted from spontaneous conversation into two different types, as well as the distinction was possible on the basis of the automatic classification. In addition, there were significant differences in acoustic parameters between the two groups of laughter. The results of the research showed that, although the distinction between voluntary and involuntary laughter categories appears based on the analysis of everyday, spontaneous conversations in terms of the perception and acoustic features, there is often an overlap in the acoustic features of voluntary and involuntary laughter. The results will enrich our previous knowledge of laughter and help to describe and explore the diversity of non-verbal vocalisations.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
“我们应该笑吗?”自发谈话中自发笑声的声学特征。
笑是最常见的非语言特征之一;然而,与之前的假设相反,它也可能作为联系、情感、情绪调节协议或同理心的信号(Scott等)。科学进展,2014(18):618-620。尽管先前的研究认为笑在许多方面并没有形成统一的群体,但不同类型的笑在个体研究中被不同地定义。由于对笑的不同定义,以及不同的方法,以往的检查结果往往是相互矛盾的。被分析的笑声通常是在受控的、人工的情况下录制的;然而,人们对社交对话中的笑声知之甚少。因此,本研究的目的是研究人类互动中出现的笑声的声学实现,以及根据听众是否认为它们是自愿的或非自愿的笑声的自动分类。本研究由三个部分组成,采用多方法方法。首先,在感知任务中,参与者必须判断给定的笑声是无意识的还是自愿的。在实验的第二部分,研究人员分析了那些被至少66.6%的听众认为是自愿或非自愿的笑声样本。在第三部分,所有的声音样本被自动分类器分为两类。结果表明,听者能够将自发对话中的笑声区分为两种不同的类型,并且这种区分是在自动分类的基础上实现的。此外,两组笑声在声学参数上也存在显著差异。研究结果表明,尽管根据对日常自发对话的感知和声学特征的分析,出现了自愿笑和非自愿笑类别的区别,但自愿笑和非自愿笑的声学特征往往是重叠的。研究结果将丰富我们之前关于笑的知识,并有助于描述和探索非语言发声的多样性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Cognitive Processing
Cognitive Processing PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL-
CiteScore
3.10
自引率
5.90%
发文量
44
期刊介绍: Cognitive Processing - International Quarterly of Cognitive Science is a peer-reviewed international journal that publishes innovative contributions in the multidisciplinary field of cognitive science.  Its main purpose is to stimulate research and scientific interaction through communication between specialists in different fields on topics of common interest and to promote an interdisciplinary understanding of the diverse topics in contemporary cognitive science. Cognitive Processing is articulated in the following sections:Cognitive DevelopmentCognitive Models of Risk and Decision MakingCognitive NeuroscienceCognitive PsychologyComputational Cognitive SciencesPhilosophy of MindNeuroimaging and Electrophysiological MethodsPsycholinguistics and Computational linguisticsQuantitative Psychology and Formal Theories in Cognitive ScienceSocial Cognition and Cognitive Science of Culture
期刊最新文献
Autistic and non-autistic adults use discourse context to determine a speaker's intention to request. Testing the dual-memory framework: individual differences in the magnitude of the retrieval practice effect and fluid intelligence The effect of cognitive intervention program on intelligence scores in preschool Choosing between bad and worse: investigating choice in moral dilemmas through the lens of control. The impact of cognitive flexibility on prospective EFL teachers' critical thinking disposition: the mediating role of self-efficacy.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1