Abstract
The goal of this paper is to focus on non-verbal speech information during meeting and see if this information contains cues enabling the discrimination of meeting phases—divergent and convergent phases using decision trees. Group task experiments were conducted using a modified 20Q. The recorded speech was analyzed to identify various utterance pattern features—utterance frequency, length of utterance, turn-taking pattern frequency, etc. Discrimination trials were conducted on groups of friends, groups of strangers, and on both groups together using these features, and discrimination accuracy rates were obtained of 77.3%, 85.2% and 77.3%, respectively, in open tests. These results are quite good, considering that they are based on non-verbal speech information alone. Among the features relating to utterance patterns used in this work, we found that silence frequency and quasi-overlapping frequency were especially effective for discrimination. Our results did not find that group friendliness or task difficulty information contributed to effective discrimination of the meeting phases.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Amitani, S., and Hori, K. (2005): ‘A Method and a System for Supporting the Process of Knowledge Creation’, Trans. Information Processing Society of Japan, vol. 46, no. 1, pp. 89–102.
Bergstrom, T. and Karahalios, K. (2007): ‘Conversation Clock: Visualizing audio patterns in colocated groups’, Proc. 40th Hawaii international Conference on System Sciences, IEEE, 3, pp. 1317–1325.
Bono, M., Suzuki, N., and Katagiri, Y. (2004): ‘Conversation: Do Interaction Behaviors Give Clues to Know Your Interest?’, Cognitive studies: bulletin of Jpn. Cognitive Science Society, vol. 11, no. 3, pp. 214–227.
Bono, M., and Takanashi, K. (2007): ‘Methodology for Analyzing Multi-Party Interaction: Overview of Analytic Units of Verbal and Non-Verbal Communication’, J. Jpn. Society for Artificial Intelligence, vol. 22, no. 6, pp. 838–845.
Cetin, O. and Shriberg, E. (2006): ‘Analysis of Overlaps in Meetings by Dialog Factors, Hot spots, Speakers, and Collection Site: Insights for Automatic Speech Recognition’, Proc. Interspeech 2006, pp. 293–296.
Chang, Z., Takanashi, K., and Kawahara, T. (2008): ‘Analysis on Morphological and Prosodic Features of Aizuti and its Correlation to Conversation Mode in Poster Presentations’, Jpn. Society for Artificial Intelligence Technical Report, SIG-SLUD-A802, pp. 7–13.
Conklin, J., and Begeman, M. L. (1988): ‘gIBIS: A Hypertext Tool for Exploratory Policy Discussion’, Proc. CSCW’88, ACM Press, pp. 140–152.
Daibo, I. (1998): Gesture and communication medium. Saiensu-sha, JP.
DiMicco, J. M., Hollenbach, KJ, Pandolfo, A., and Bender, W. (2007): ‘The Impact of Increased Awareness while Face-to-Face. Special Issue on Awareness Systems Design’, Human-Computer Interaction. vol. 22, no. 1.
Guilford, J.P. (1983): ‘Transformation: Abilities or functions’, J. Creative Behavior, 17, pp. 75–86.
Hori, K. (2004): The ABC of facilitation. Nikkei Publishing.
Horiuchi, Y., Yoshino, A., Naka, M., et al. (1997): ‘The Chiba Map Task Dialogue Corpus Project’, Research reports of Faculty of Technology, vol. 48, no. 2, Chiba University, pp. 33–60.
Ichino, J., Takeuchi, K. and Isahara, H. (2009): ‘Improvement of Member’s Concentration during Discussion’, Proc. HCII2009, LNCS 5617, pp. 59–68.
Inspiration Software Inc.: ‘Inspiration’, http://www.inspiration.com/.
Kim, T., Chang, A., Holland, L., and Pentland, A. (2008): ‘Meeting mediator: Enhancing Group Collaboration using Sociometric Feedback’, Proc. CSCW’08, ACM Press, pp. 457–466.
Koiso, H., Horiuchi, Y., Tutiya, S., Ichikawa, A., and Den, Y. (1998): ‘An analysis of turn-taking and backchannels based on prosodic and syntactic features in Japanese map task dialogs’, Langurage and Speech, vol. 41, no. 3–4, pp. 295–321.
Koiso, H., and Den, Y. (2000): ‘How is the Smooth Transition between Speakers Realized?’, Cognitive studies: bulletin of Jpn. Cognitive Science Society, vol. 7, no.1, pp. 93–106.
Levine, J.M. and Moreland, R.L. (2004): ‘Collaboration: The Social Context of Theory Development’, Personality and Social Psychology Review, vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 164–172.
Mahl, G. F. (1956): ‘Disturbances and silences in the patient’s speech in psychotherapy’, J. Abnormal and Social Psychology, 53, pp. 1–15.
McGuffin, L., and Olson, G. M. (1992): ‘ShrEdit: A shared electronic workspace’, CSMIL Technical Report 45, University of Michigan, Cognitive Science and Machine Intelligence Laboratory.
Munemori, J., Horikiri, I, and Nagasawa, Y. (1994): ‘Groupware for New Idea Generation Support System (GUNGEN) and Its Application and Estimation to the Student Experiments of the Distributed and Cooperative KJ Method’, Trans. Information Processing Society of Japan, vol. 35, no. 1, pp. 143–153.
Nakai, Y. (2006): ‘Verbal and non-verbal engagement displays in a Japanese face-to-face conversation between two native speakers and two non-native speakers’, Bulletin of Center for Jpn. Language, 19, Waseda University, pp. 79–98.
Nagaoka, C., Komori, M., Draguna Raluca Maria, et al. (2003): ‘Mutual Congruence of Vocal Behavior in Cooperative Dialogues’, Proc. Human Interface 2003, Japan, pp. 167–170.
Nishimoto, K., Mase, K., and Nakatsu, R. (1999): ‘How an Autonomous Information Retrieval Agent Affects Divergent Thinking by a Group’, J. Jpn. Society for Artificial Intelligence, vol. 14, no. 1, 58–70.
Ohsuga. T., Horiuchi, Y., Nishida, M., and Ichikawa, A. (2006): ‘Prediction of Turn-Taking from Prosody in Spontaneous Dialogue’, Trans. Jpn. Society for Artificial Intelligence, vol. 21, no. 1, pp. 1–8.
Olguin, D.O., Waber, B.N., Kim, T., et al. (2009): ‘Sensible organizations: Technology and methodology for automatically measuring organizational behavior’, IEEE Trans. Syst., Man, Cybern. B, Cybern., vol. 39, no. 1, pp. 43–55.
Quinlan, J. R. (1992): C4.5: Programs for Machine Learning. Morgan Kaufmann.
Smith, E.E. and Kight, S.S. (1959): ‘Effects of Feedback on Insight and Problem-Solving Efficiency in Training Groups’, J. Applied Psychology, 43, pp. 209–211.
Stefik, M., Foster, G., Bobrow, D. G., Kahn, K., Lanning, S., and Suchman, L. (1987): ‘Beyond the chalkboard, Computer support for collaboration and problem solving in meetings’, Comm. ACM, vol. 30, no. 1, pp. 32–47.
Taylor, D. W., and Faust, W. I. (1952): ‘Twenty questions: Efficiency in problem solving as a function of size of group’, J. Experimental Psychology, 44, 360–368.
Wrede, B and Shriberg, E. Spotting (2003): ‘“Hot Spots” in Meetings: Human Judgements and Prosodic Cues’, Proc. Eurospeech 2003, pp. 2805–2808.
Wilson, D.S., Timmel, J. J., and Miller, R.M. (2004): ‘Cognitive cooperation: when the going gets tough, think as a group’, Human Nature, vol. 15, no. 3, pp. 225–250.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2011 Springer-Verlag London Limited
About this paper
Cite this paper
Ichino, J. (2011). Discriminating Divergent/Convergent Phases of Meeting Using Non-Verbal Speech Patterns. In: Bødker, S., Bouvin, N., Wulf, V., Ciolfi, L., Lutters, W. (eds) ECSCW 2011: Proceedings of the 12th European Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 24-28 September 2011, Aarhus Denmark. Springer, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-85729-913-0_9
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-85729-913-0_9
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, London
Print ISBN: 978-0-85729-912-3
Online ISBN: 978-0-85729-913-0
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)