CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 342Language, Discourse, Communication StrategiesHand Gesture Recognition SystemsAction Observation and Synchronization

How do gestures influence thinking and speaking? The gesture-for-conceptualization hypothesis.

Open access
Kita, Sotaro, Alibali, Martha W., Chu, Mingyuan·2017·Psychological Review
DOI 10.1037/rev0000059
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

People spontaneously produce gestures during speaking and thinking. The authors focus here on gestures that depict or indicate information related to the contents of concurrent speech or thought (i.e., representational gestures). Previous research indicates that such gestures have not only communicative functions, but also self-oriented cognitive functions. In this article, the authors propose a new theoretical framework, the gesture-for-conceptualization hypothesis, which explains the self-oriented functions of representational gestures. According to this framework, representational gestures affect cognitive processes in 4 main ways: gestures activate, manipulate, package, and explore spatio-motoric information for speaking and thinking. These four functions are shaped by gesture's ability to schematize information, that is, to focus on a small subset of available information that is potentially relevant to the task at hand. The framework is based on the assumption that gestures are generated from the same system that generates practical actions, such as object manipulation; however, gestures are distinct from practical actions in that they represent information. The framework provides a novel, parsimonious, and comprehensive account of the self-oriented functions of gestures. The authors discuss how the framework accounts for gestures that depict abstract or metaphoric content, and they consider implications for the relations between self-oriented and communicative functions of gestures. (PsycINFO Database Record

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/rev0000059

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 15

  1. Alibali, M. W., Flevares, L., & Goldin-Meadow, S. (1997). Assessing knowledge conveyed in gesture: Do teachers have the upper hand? Journal of Educational Psychology, 89 , 183-193.
  2. Alibali, M. W., & Kita, S. (2010). Gesture highlights perceptually present information for speakers. Gesture , 10 (1), 3-28. doi: 10.1075/gest.10.1.02ali · DOI
  3. Alibali, M. W., Heath, D. C., & Myers, H. J. (2001). Effects of visibility between speaker and listener on gesture production: Some gestures are meant to be seen. Journal of Memory and Language , 44 , 169-188.
  4. Alibali, M. W., & Nathan, M. J. (2011). Embodiment in mathematics teaching and learning: Evidence from learners' and teachers' gestures. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 21 (2), 247-286. doi:10.1080/10508406.2011.611446 · DOI
  5. Alibali, M. W., Nathan, M. J., & Fujimori, Y. (2011). Gestures in the mathematics classroom: What's the point? In N. Stein & S. Raudenbush (Eds.), Developmental Cognitive Science Goes To School (pp. 219-234). New York: Routledge, Taylor and Francis.
  6. Alibali, M. W., Spencer, R. C., Knox, L., & Kita, S. (2011). Spontaneous gestures influence strategy choices in problem solving. Psychological Science , 22 (9), 1138-1144. doi: 10.1177/0956797611417722 · DOI
  7. Alibali, M. W., Yeo, A., Hostetter, A. B., & Kita, S. (in press). Representational gestures help speakers package information for speaking. In R. B. Church, M. W. Alibali & S. D. Kelly (Eds.), Why Gesture? How the hands function in speaking, thinking and communicating . Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
  8. Annett, J. (1990). Relations between verbal and gestural explanations. In G. E. Hammond (Ed.), Cerebral Control of Speech and Limb Movements . Amsterdam: Elsevier Science Publishers.
  9. Argyriou, P., & Kita, S. (2013). The effect of left-hand gestures on metaphor explanation. In M. Knaff, M. Pauen, N. Sebanz & I. Wachsmuth (Eds.), Proceedings of the Thirty Fifth Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 1762-1767). Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society.
  10. Argyriou, P., Mohr, C., & Kita, S. (in press). Hand matters: Left-hand gestures enhance metaphor explanation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory and Cognition .
  11. Atit, K., Gagnier, K. & Shipley, T. (2015). Student gestures aid penetrative thinking. Journal of Geoscience Education, 63 , 66-72.
  12. Bauer, M. I. & Johnson-Laird, P. N. (1993). How diagrams can improve reasoning. Psychological Science, 4 (6), 372-378.
  13. Beattie, G., & Coughlan, J. (1999). An experimental investigation of the role of iconic gestures in lexical access using the tip-of-the-tongue phenomenon. British Journal of Psychology , 90 , 35-56.
  14. Goldin-Meadow, S., Cook, S. W., & Mitchell, Z. A. (2009). Gesturing gives children new ideas about math. Psychological Science , 20 , 267-272. Goldin-Meadow, S., Nusbaum, H., Kelly, S. D., & Wagner, S. M. (2001). Explaining math: Gesturing lightens the load. Psychological Science , 12 , 516-522. Goldin-Meadow, S., Wein, D., & Chang, C. (1992). Assessing knowledge through gesture: Using children's hands to read their minds. Cognition & Instruction, 9 (3), 201-219. Goldin-Meadow, S., & Wagner, S. M. (2005). How our hands help us learn. Trends In Cognitive Sciences, 9 (5), 234-241. doi:10.1016/j.tics.2005.03.006 Guilford, J. P. (1967). The nature of human intelligence . New York, NY: McGraw-Hill. Hadar, U., & Butterworth, B. (1997). Iconic gestures, imagery, and word retrieval in speech. Semiotica , 115-1/2 , 147-172. Hatano, G., Miyake, Y., & Binks, M. G. (1977). Performance of expert abacus operators. Cognition, 5 (1), 47-55. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(77)90016-6 Hegarty, M., Mayer, S., Kriz, S., & Keehner. (2005). The role of gestures in mental animation. Spatial Cognition and Computation, 5 (4), 33-356. Hladk ý , V., & Havlí č ek, J. (2013). Was Tinbergen an Aristotelian? Comparison of Tinbergen's four whys and Aristotle's four causes. Human Ethology Bulletin, 28 (4), 3-11. Hostetter, A. B. (2011). When do gestures communicate? A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin , 137 (2), 297-315. doi: 10.1037/a0022128 Hostetter, A. B. (2014). Action attenuates the effect of visibility on gesture rates. Cognitive Science , 38 (7), 1468-1481. doi: 10.1111/cogs.12113 Hostetter, A. B., & Alibali, M. W. (2008). Visible embodiment: Gestures as simulated action. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review , 15 (3), 495-514. doi: 10.3758/PBR.15.3.495 Hostetter, A. B., & Alibali, M. W. (2010). Language, gesture, action! A test of the Gesture as Simulated Action framework. Journal of Memory and Language , 63 , 245-257. Hostetter, A. B., & Alibali, M. W. (2011). Cognitive skills and gesture-speech redundancy: Formulation difficulty or communicative strategy? Gesture , 11 (1), 40-60. doi: 10.1075/gest.11.1.03hos Hostetter, A. B., Alibali, M. W. & Bartholomew, A. (2011). Gesture during mental rotation. In L. Carlson, C. Hoelscher & T. F. Shipley, (Eds.), Proceedings of the 33rd Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Societ y (pp. 1448-1453). Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society. Hostetter, A. B., Alibali, M. W., & Kita, S. (2007). I see it in my hands' eye: Representational gestures reflect conceptual demands. Language and Cognitive Processes , 22 , 313-336. Hostetter, A. B., & Boncoddo, R. (in press). Gestures highlight perceptual-motor representation in thinking. In R. B. Church, M. W. Alibali & S. D. Kelly (Eds.), Why gesture? How the hands function in speaking, thinking and communicating . Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Jacobs, N., & Garnham, A. (2007). The role of conversational hand gestures in a narrative task. Journal of Memory and Language, 56 (2), 291-303. Johnson, M. (1987). The body in the mind. The bodily basis of meaning, imagination, and reason . Chicago/London: The University of Chicago Press. · DOI
  15. Kang, S., Tversky, B., & Black, J. B. (2015). Coordinating gesture, word, and diagram: Explanations for experts and novices. Spatial Cognition & Computation , 15 (1), 126. Kendon, A. (1994). Do gestures communicate? A review. Research on Language and Social Interaction , 27 , 175-200. Kendon, A. (2004). Gesture: Visible action as utterance. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Kirk, E., & Lewis, C. (in press). Gesture facilitates chilren's creative thinking. Psychological Science . Kita, S. (2000). How representational gestures help speaking. In D. McNeill (Ed.), Language and gesture (pp. 162-185). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Kita, S. (2014). Production of speech-accompanying gesture. In V. Ferreira, M. Goldrick & M. Miozzo (Eds.), Oxford Handbook of Language Production (pp. 451-459). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Kita, S., Danziger, E., & Stolz, C. (2001). Cultural specificity of spatial schemas, as manifested in spontaneous gestures. In M. Gattis (Ed.), Spatial schemas and abstract thought (pp. 115-146). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Kita, S., & Davies, T. S. (2009). Competing conceptual representations tirgger co-speech representational gestures. Language and Cognitive Processes , 24 , 761-775. Kita, S., de Condappa, O., & Mohr, C. (2007). Metaphor explanation attenuates the righthand preference for depictive co-speech gestures that imitate actions. Brain and Language, 101 (3), 185. doi:10.1016/j.bandl.2006.11.006 Kita, S., & Özyürek, A. (2003). What does cross-linguistic variation in semantic coordination of speech and gesture reveal? Evidence for an interface representation of spatial thinking and speaking. Journal of Memory and Language , 48 , 16-32. Kita, S., Gijn, I. van, & Hulst, H. van der (1998). Movement phases in signs and cospeech gestures, and their transcription by human coders. In I. Wachsmuth & M. Fröhlich (Eds.), Gesture and sign language in human-computer interactions. Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence (Vol. 1317, pp. 23-35). Berlin: SpringerVerlag. Koedinger, K. R., Alibali, M. W., & Nathan, M. J. (2008). Trade-offs between grounded and abstract representations: Evidence from algebra problem solving. Cognitive Science , 32 (2), 366-397. doi: 10.1080/03640210701863933 Krahmer, E. J., & Swerts, M. G. J. (2007). The effects of visual beats on prosodic prominence: Acoustic analyses, auditory perception and visual perception. Journal of Memory and Language , 57 (3), 396-414. doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2007.06.005 Krauss, R. M., Chen, Y., & Gottesman, R. (2000). Lexical gestures and lexical access: A process model. In D. McNeill (Ed.), Language and gesture (pp. 261-283). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by . Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Lakoff & R. Núñez. (2000). Where mathematics comes from: How the embodied mind brings mathematics into being . New York: Basic Books. · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kita, S., Alibali, M. W., & Chu, M.
Affiliations
University of Wisconsin–Madison (US)
Corresponding author
Kita, Sotaro
ORCID
Venue
Psychological Review
Publisher
American Psychological Association (APA)
Published
2017-04
Volume
124
Issue
3
Pages
245-266
ISSN
  • 0033-295X (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-1471
DOI
10.1037/rev0000059
OpenAlex
W2560536634
Cited by
342
References
4
Citations by year
2026: 32 · 2025: 53 · 2024: 44 · 2023: 45 · 2022: 44 · 2021: 29 · 2020: 28 · 2019: 38 · 2018: 23 · 2017: 6
FWCI
150.75
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
other-oa
Locations
  • Psychological Review (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Warwick Research Archive Portal (University of Warwick) (acceptedVersion)
  • Aberdeen University Research Archive (Aberdeen University) (submittedVersion)
  • MPG.PuRe (Max Planck Society) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › Language, Discourse, Communication Strategies
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Hand Gesture Recognition Systems
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Action Observation and Synchronization
Keywords
representational gestures, gesture and thought, speech and gesture, schematization, practical action, metaphor
MeSH terms
Cognition, Concept Formation, Gestures, Humans, Speech, Thinking

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