Gesture, self-repair and reasoning in schizophrenia Christine Howes - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Gesture, self-repair and reasoning in schizophrenia Christine Howes with Mary Lavelle, Patrick G.T. Healey, Ellen Breitholtz, Julian Hough, Rose McCabe 24th June 2016 Christine Howes2015

Background 1 Method 2 Results 3 Conclusions 4 Christine Howes2015

Background 1 Method 2 Results 3 Conclusions 4 Christine Howes2015

Background Successful social encounters require mutual understanding between people People must monitor their own and others’ behaviour for potential misunderstandings Problems can be signalled non-verbally with interactive gestures (Bavelas et al., 1992) Or addressed verbally using repair (Schegloff et al., 1977) Christine Howes2015

Background For non-clinical participants: repair can aid comprehension (Brennan and Schober, 2001) people compensate for verbal difficulties using head nods and hand gestures (Seyfeddinipur and Kita, 2014; Healey et al., 2013, 2015) Is this also true for patients with schizophrenia? Christine Howes2015

Background For non-clinical participants: repair can aid comprehension (Brennan and Schober, 2001) people compensate for verbal difficulties using head nods and hand gestures (Seyfeddinipur and Kita, 2014; Healey et al., 2013, 2015) Is this also true for patients with schizophrenia? What can this tell us about “normal” interaction? Christine Howes2015

Background Patients with schizophrenia experience difficulties in social interaction. They: use fewer self-repairs in their talk (Leudar et al., 1992; Caplan et al., 1996) have difficulty monitoring their own behaviour (Johns et al., 2001) display fewer hand gestures when speaking (Lavelle et al., 2013) have mismatched gesture use and speech (Millman et al., 2014) have difficulty interpreting figurative language and inferring others’ mental states (Gavil´ an and Garc´ ıa-Albea, 2011) jump to conclusions (Dudley and Over, 2003) Christine Howes2015

Background Most studies of patients’ nonverbal, verbal and reasoning behaviour relies on non-interactive data (e.g. monologues, offline tasks) or dialogues with known interlocutors (e.g. therapist, family members) Do these findings hold in social interactions, with unknown partners? Christine Howes2015

Background The presence of a patient with schizophrenia influences the nonverbal behaviour of their interacting partners: in clinical contexts (Lavelle et al., 2015) and during first meetings with healthy controls, when the patient’s diagnosis is undisclosed (Lavelle et al., 2013, 2014) Does interaction itself play a crucial role in patients’ deficits in dialogue? Do their healthy partners modify their own behaviours? Christine Howes2015

Research questions Compared to conversations without a patient, and patients’ healthy conversational partners: Do patients with schizophrenia use less 1 self-repair and gesture during conversation? Is their use of self-repair associated with 2 their use of gesture? Do patients reason differently in dialogue? 3 Christine Howes2015

Background 1 Method 2 Results 3 Conclusions 4 Christine Howes2015

Data Triadic conversations of approximately 5 minutes 20 patient interactions one patient two healthy controls who were unaware of the patient’s diagnosis 20 control interactions three healthy participants Christine Howes2015

Who would you throw out? William Harris: Balloon pilot Susanne Harris: 7 months pregnant wife Robert Lewis: Cancer research scientist Heather Sloan: Musical child prodigy Christine Howes2015

Data (2) Motion capture (1) Video Christine Howes2015

(3) Transcriptions A The lady’s, the lady’s pregnant, so we’re saying we don’t want to throw her out C [Well, I don’t know, we can chuck her] A [And the little child], the little child, I don’t think she’s any use C Yeah, [who let a nine year old child go on a hot air balloon?] A [But, it it’s just because she’s young] B [Yeah]. A [But, sh-] even if they did throw her out, she’d be quite light B Yeah A So she wouldn’t really [make a difference] C [So you] should throw out the pregnant woman, [because like, she’s probably gonna be the heaviest, and]= A [She’s two people] C =I’m guessing they’re all like normal weight A Ummm, I think the husband B Yeah, but he’s he’s the only one with any flying experience Christine Howes2015

Analysis Self-repair (Hough and Purver, 2014) STIR (STrongly Incremental Repair detection) state-of-the-art incremental disfluency detector (accuracy 0.81 repairs, 0.94 edit terms) self-repair rate per word calculated for each individual Gesture (Lavelle et al., 2012) derived from MoCap hand movements data through automatic gesture extraction. hand movement speeds > 1 sd above an individual’s mean hand movement speed Christine Howes2015

Self-repair A The lady’s, the lady’s pregnant, so we’re saying we don’t want to throw her out C [Well, I don’t know, we can chuck her] A [And the little child], the little child, I don’t think she’s any use C Yeah, [who let a nine year old child go on a hot air balloon?] A [But, it it’s just because she’s young] B [Yeah]. A [But, sh-] even if they did throw her out, she’d be quite light B Yeah A So she wouldn’t really [make a difference] C [So you] should throw out the pregnant woman, [because like, she’s probably gonna be the heaviest, and]= A [She’s sh- sh- two people] C =I’m guessing they’re all like normal weight A Ummm, I think the husband B Yeah, but he’s he’s the only one with any flying experience Christine Howes2015

Analysis Reasoning (Breitholtz et al., 2015) Manual annotation Does the current turn contain a reason for throwing or saving one of the balloon’s occupants? Christine Howes2015

Reasoning A The lady’s, the lady’s pregnant, so we’re saying we don’t want to throw her out C [Well, I don’t know, we can chuck her] A [And the little child], the little child, I don’t think she’s any use C Yeah, [who let a nine year old child go on a hot air balloon?] A [But, it it’s just because she’s young] B [Yeah]. A [But, sh-] even if they did throw her out, she’d be quite light B Yeah A So she wouldn’t really [make a difference] C [So you] should throw out the pregnant woman, [because like, she’s probably gonna be the heaviest, and]= A [She’s sh- sh- two people] C =I’m guessing they’re all like normal weight A Ummm, I think the husband B Yeah, but he’s he’s the only one with any flying experience Christine Howes2015

Background 1 Method 2 Results 3 Conclusions 4 Christine Howes2015

Self-repair rate χ 2 N M (sd) β SE p Patient 19 0.01 (0.01) -0.02 0.004 12.59 < 0.001 HP partner 38 0.02 (0.02) -0.01 0.004 2.78 0.1 Controls 57 0.03 (0.02) Healthy participants in control groups used more self-repair than schizophrenia patients Christine Howes2015

Overall gesture rate χ 2 N M (sd) β SE p Patient 19 7.2 (2.8) 0.21 0.84 0.06 0.8 HP partner 38 7.7 (3.0) 0.55 0.63 0.77 0.38 Controls 57 7.2 (3.0) No significant differences in overall rates of gesture Christine Howes2015

Speaker gesture rate χ 2 N M (sd) β SE p Patient 19 12.5 (2.8) -5.84 2.91 4.01 0.05 HP partner 38 13.1 (3.0) -3.29 1.99 2.78 0.1 Controls 57 16.5 (3.0) Patients use significantly fewer hand gestures when speaking Christine Howes2015

Gesture and self-repair In control groups, self-repair is positively correlated with gesture r = 0 . 35 , p = 0 . 02 Christine Howes2015

Reasoning Control Patient groups Total groups Control Patient Total Conversations 18 18 36 Participants 54 36 18 54 108 Turns per person 46.7 39.7 29.3 36.2 41.5 Words per person 391.1 367.0 210.9 315.0 353.0 Words per turn 8.4 9.3 7.2 8.7 8.5 Arguments per person 8.1 7.3 4.4 6.3 7.2 Arguments per turn 0.17 0.18 0.15 0.17 0.17 Christine Howes2015

Reasoning Control Patient groups Total groups Control Patient Total Conversations 18 18 36 Participants 54 36 18 54 108 Turns per person 46.7 39.7 29.3 36.2 41.5 Words per person 391.1 367.0 210.9 315.0 353.0 Words per turn 8.4 9.3 7.2 8.7 8.5 Arguments per person 8.1 7.3 4.4 6.3 7.2 Arguments per turn 0.17 0.18 0.15 0.17 0.17 Patients come up with fewer arguments regarding who to throw out of the balloon Christine Howes2015

Reasoning Control Patient groups Total groups Control Patient Total Conversations 18 18 36 Participants 54 36 18 54 108 Turns per person 46.7 39.7 29.3 36.2 41.5 Words per person 391.1 367.0 210.9 315.0 353.0 Words per turn 8.4 9.3 7.2 8.7 8.5 Arguments per person 8.1 7.3 4.4 6.3 7.2 Arguments per turn 0.17 0.18 0.15 0.17 0.17 Patients come up with fewer arguments regarding who to throw out of the balloon Patients make fewer dialogue contributions Christine Howes2015

Reasoning Control Patient groups Total groups Control Patient Total Conversations 18 18 36 Participants 54 36 18 54 108 Turns per person 46.7 39.7 29.3 36.2 41.5 Words per person 391.1 367.0 210.9 315.0 353.0 Words per turn 8.4 9.3 7.2 8.7 8.5 Arguments per person 8.1 7.3 6.3 7.2 Arguments per turn 0.17 0.18 0.15 0.17 0.17 Patients’ partners use more words per turn Christine Howes2015