The DOI matches its Crossref record; 86 of the 86 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Dialog as interpersonal synergy
Open accessAbstract
What is the proper unit of analysis in the psycholinguistics of dialog? While classical approaches are largely based on models of individual linguistic processing, recent advances stress the social coordinative nature of dialog. In the influential interactive alignment model, dialogue is thus approached as the progressive entrainment of interlocutors' linguistic behaviors toward the alignment of situation models. Still, the driving mechanisms are attributed to individual cognition in the form of automatic structural priming. Challenging these ideas, we outline a dynamical framework for studying dialog based on the notion of interpersonal synergy . Crucial to this synergetic model is the emphasis on dialog as an emergent, self-organizing, interpersonal system capable of functional coordination. A consequence of this model is that linguistic processes cannot be reduced to the workings of individual cognitive systems but must be approached also at the interpersonal level. From the synergy model follows a number of new predictions: beyond simple synchrony, good dialog affords complementary dynamics, constrained by contextual sensitivity and functional specificity. We substantiate our arguments by reference to recent empirical studies supporting the idea of dialog as interpersonal synergy.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation
Sacks, H., Schegloff, E. A., & Jefferson, G. (1974) · Language · doi:10.2307/412243 · Cited by 11,350
Hutchins, E. (1995) · doi:10.7551/mitpress/1881.001.0001 · Cited by 10,801 · cited 2×
“Complementarity of behaviors and distribution of roles are indeed crucial in most collective tasks: from the highly codified piloting of an airplane and sailing of a battleship (Hutchins, 1995a, 1995b) to telephone conversations (Schegloff, 1986) and collective memory (Peltokorpi, 2008).”
BackgroundOn The Language Instinct: (412952005-009)
Pinker, S., & American Psychological Association (1994) · PsycEXTRA Dataset · doi:10.1037/e412952005-009 · Cited by 5,646
Synchronization a universal concept in nonlinear sciences
PIKOVSKY, A. S., Rosenblum, M. G., & Kurths, J. (2001) · Cited by 5,640
The way we think: conceptual blending and the mind's hidden complexities
(2002) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.40-1223 · Cited by 5,327
The faculty of language: what is it, who has it, and how did it evolve?
Hauser, M. D., Chomsky, N., & Fitch, W. T. (2002) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.298.5598.1569 · Cited by 5,189
Recurrence plots for the analysis of complex systems
MARWAN, N., CARMENROMANO, M., THIEL, M., & KURTHS, J. (2007) · Physics Reports · doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2006.11.001 · Cited by 3,814
The chameleon effect: the perception–behavior link and social interaction
Chartrand, T. L., & Bargh, J. A. (1999) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.76.6.893 · Cited by 3,674
Scripts, Plans, Goals, and Understanding: An Inquiry into Human Knowledge Structures
Kronenfeld, D. B., Schank, R. C., & Abelson, R. P. (1978) · Language · doi:10.2307/412850 · Cited by 3,054
Scripts, Plans, Goals, and Understanding: An Inquiry into Human Knowledge Structures
Hunt, E., Schank, R., & Abelson, R. (1979) · The American Journal of Psychology · doi:10.2307/1421499 · Cited by 2,944
Cited by
Koban, L., Ramamoorthy, A., & Konvalinka, I. (2019) · Social Neuroscience · doi:10.1080/17470919.2017.1400463 · Cited by 180
Fusaroli, R., Bjørndahl, J. S., Roepstorff, A., & Tylén, K. (2016) · Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance · doi:10.1037/xhp0000207 · Cited by 76
Self-citationInterpersonal Physiological Synchrony Predicts Group Cohesion
Tomashin, A., Gordon, I., & Wallot, S. (2022) · Frontiers in Human Neuroscience · doi:10.3389/fnhum.2022.903407 · Cited by 45
Rhythm perception, speaking rate entrainment, and conversational quality: a mediated model
Wynn, C. J., Barrett, T. S., & Borrie, S. A. (2022) · Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research · doi:10.1044/2022_jslhr-21-00293 · Cited by 31
Multimodal modeling of collaborative problem-solving facets in triads
Stewart, A. E. B., Keirn, Z., & D’Mello, S. K. (2021) · User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction · doi:10.1007/s11257-021-09290-y · Cited by 30
Metadata
- Authors
- Fusaroli, R., Rączaszek-Leonardi, J., & Tylén, K.
- Venue
- New Ideas in Psychology
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2014-01
- Volume
- 32
- Pages
- 147-157
- ISSN
- 0732-118X (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2035093168
- Cited by
- 337
- References
- 86
- FWCI
- 166.17
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Dialog as interpersonal synergy. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.newideapsych.2013.03.005
- The paper
- Fusaroli, R., Rączaszek-Leonardi, J., & Tylén, K. (2014). Dialog as interpersonal synergy. New Ideas in Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.newideapsych.2013.03.005
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.