MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2019311330 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0102019

Interpersonal Similarity between Body Movements in Face-To-Face Communication in Daily Life

2014· article· en· W2019311330 on OpenAlexaff
Naoki Higo, K. Ogawa, Juichi Minemura, Bujie Xu, Takayuki Nozawa, Taiki Ogata, Koji Ara, Kazuo Yano, Yoshihiro Miyake

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAction Observation and Synchronization
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Aging
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInterpersonal communicationGestureFace (sociological concept)Similarity (geometry)Synchronization (alternating current)Computer sciencePsychologyFace-to-faceCommunicationComputer visionTelecommunicationsSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Individuals are embedded in social networks in which they communicate with others in their daily lives. Because smooth face-to-face communication is the key to maintaining these networks, measuring the smoothness of such communication is an important issue. One indicator of smoothness is the similarity of the body movements of the two individuals concerned. A typical example noted in experimental environments is the interpersonal synchronization of body movements such as nods and gestures during smooth face-to-face communication. It should therefore be possible to estimate quantitatively the smoothness of face-to-face communication in social networks through measurement of the synchronization of body movements. However, this is difficult because social networks, which differ from disciplined experimental environments, are open environments for the face-to-face communication between two individuals. In such open environments, their body movements become complicated by various external factors and may follow unstable and nonuniform patterns. Nevertheless, we consider there to be some interaction during face-to-face communication that leads to the interpersonal synchronization of body movements, which can be seen through the interpersonal similarity of body movements. The present study aims to clarify such interaction in terms of body movements during daily face-to-face communication in real organizations of more than 100 people. We analyzed data on the frequency of body movement for each individual during face-to-face communication, as measured by a wearable sensor, and evaluated the degree of interpersonal similarity of body movements between two individuals as their frequency difference. Furthermore, we generated uncorrelated data by resampling the data gathered and compared these two data sets statistically to distinguish the effects of actual face-to-face communication from those of the activities accompanying the communication. Our results confirm an interpersonal similarity of body movements between two individuals in face-to-face communication, for all the organizations studied, and suggest that some body interaction is behind this similarity.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.914

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.100
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.216 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations14
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONESame topicAction Observation and SynchronizationFrench-language works237,207