Scribd
Upload
47 views2 pages

Mime and Gesture For Large Class

1) The document discusses a study that examined the types of gestures people produce when solving insight problems silently versus explaining solutions out loud. 2) When solving problems with high spatial working memory demands, participants produced more gestures, likely to offload working memory like a diagram. 3) When explaining solutions, participants enacted them gesturally, which may have served to communicate their thought process to the imagined audience of the video recording.

Uploaded by

RACE STUDY CENTER
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
47 views2 pages

Mime and Gesture For Large Class

1) The document discusses a study that examined the types of gestures people produce when solving insight problems silently versus explaining solutions out loud. 2) When solving problems with high spatial working memory demands, participants produced more gestures, likely to offload working memory like a diagram. 3) When explaining solutions, participants enacted them gesturally, which may have served to communicate their thought process to the imagined audience of the video recording.

Uploaded by

RACE STUDY CENTER
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

UC Merced

Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science


Society

Title
Gestures for Thinking and Explaining

Permalink
https://escholarship.org/uc/item/4252g6h0

Journal
Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, 27(27)

ISSN
1069-7977

Authors
Kessell, Angela M.
Tversky, Barbara

Publication Date
2005

Peer reviewed

eScholarship.org Powered by the California Digital Library


University of California
Gestures for Thinking and Explaining
Angela M. Kessell ([email protected])

Barbara Tversky ([email protected])


Department of Psychology, Bldg. 420 Jordan Hall
Stanford, CA 94305 USA

there was no difference in frequency of gesture by type


Introduction while explaining the solution.
In contrast, for the Two String problem, participants
Gestures are universal in speaking, yet occur in silent
gestured little during solution, and during explanation
thought as well (McNeill, 1992). What kinds of gestures are
produced significantly more enactment gestures than scene
used for each? To address this question, participants were creation gestures, t(10) = 7.15, p < .001, and than action
videotaped while silently solving insight problems and depiction gestures, t(10) = 6.47, p < .001.
while explaining their solutions. The content of the
problems included spatial arrays and actions, conditions 6

known to elicit iconic gestures (Goldin-Meadow, 2003). 5


The expectation was that some problems would elicit

Mean # of gestures
gestures in the service of solving problems in the absence of 4
speech or communication. The comparison of gestures Scene creation
3 Enactment
elicited in problem solving to those accompanying Action depiction
communication of solutions should give insight into the 2
kinds of gestures useful for thinking and those useful for
communicating. 1

0
Method Solve Solve Explain Explain
LoWM HiWM LoWM HiWM
Twenty-two Stanford undergraduates solved six spatial
insight problems. Participants were videotaped both while Figure 1: Mean number of gestures while solving and
silently trying to solve the problems (Solve) and while explaining high and low spatial working memory problems.
explaining the solutions to the camera (Explain).
Discussion
Results
Gestures during problem solving were intended for the
All deictic and representational gestures were counted. Beat gesturer, and were produced only when spatial working
gestures were ignored. As expected, most participants (M = memory demands were high. Presumably, they served much
86.58%, SEM = 2.96) gestured while explaining the like a diagram, to offload working memory. Although
solutions. In contrast, during silent solution only two participants necessarily thought of the actions entailed in the
problems elicited gestures from a majority of participants solution, they did not enact the solution gesturally until they
(M = 62.75% SEM = 0.85). Notably, both of these problems had to communicate the solution in speech. It is possible
have high spatial working memory (WM) demands, in that solution enactment in explanation was meant to serve
contrast to the other problems. thought in the listener (i.e. the imagined audience for the
A detailed analysis of the conceptual content was carried videotape). However, it is also possible that solution
out for two problems: Maier’s (1931) Two String problem enactment was simply unnecessary during the solution stage
(low spatial WM) and the Six Glasses problem (Ashcraft, because the solutions entailed few steps, placing only a
1994) (high spatial WM). Only those participants who small load on working memory.
correctly solved the problem were included for each
problem. Each gesture was coded as one of three types.
Scene creation gestures conveyed the spatial positions and
References
properties of objects in the problem (e.g. pointing to the Ashcraft, M. H. (1994) Human memory and cognition. New
positions of two strings). Enactment gestures mimed actions York, NY: Harper Collins.
the person would need to perform in order to solve the Goldin-Meadow, S. (2003). Hearing gesture: How our
problem (e.g. simulating tying two strings together). Action hands help us think. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press.
depiction gestures portrayed actions of objects in the scene Maier, N.R.F. (1931). Reasoning in humans II: The solution
(e.g. modeling a swinging string). of a problem and its appearance in consciousness. Journal
During solution of the Six Glasses problem, participants of Comparative Psychology, 12, 181-194.
produced significantly more scene creation than enactment McNeill, D. (1992). Hand and mind: What gestures reveal
gestures, t(21) = 3.29, p < .01 (see Figure 1). However, about thought. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

2498

You might also like