Cited by 474Action Observation and SynchronizationSocial Robot Interaction and HRIChild and Animal Learning Development

Interpersonal synchrony: a survey of evaluation methods across disciplines.

Delaherche, Emilie, Chetouani, Mohamed, Mahdhaoui, Ammar, Saint-Georges, Catherine, Viaux, Sylvie, Cohen, David·2012·IEEE Transactions on Affective Computing

Abstract

Synchrony refers to individuals' temporal coordination during social interactions. The analysis of this phenomenon is complex, requiring the perception and integration of multimodal communicative signals. The evaluation of synchrony has received multidisciplinary attention because of its role in early development, language learning, and social connection. Originally studied by developmental psychologists, synchrony has now captured the interest of researchers in such fields as social signal processing, robotics, and machine learning. This paper emphasizes the current questions asked by synchrony evaluation and the state-of-the-art related methods. First, we present definitions and functions of synchrony in youth and adulthood. Next, we review the noncomputational and computational approaches of annotating, evaluating, and modeling interactional synchrony. Finally, the current limitations and future research directions in the fields of developmental robotics, social robotics, and clinical studies are discussed.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/t-affc.2012.12

Cites

140 of 140 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Most studies of interpersonal synchrony to date have examined movement dynamics, which may be recorded by means of video images or dedicated motion-tracking devices.

    “Most studies of interpersonal synchrony to date have examined movement dynamics, which may be recorded by means of video images or dedicated motion-tracking devices (Delaherche et al., 2012).”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

4 of the 144 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Delaherche, E., Chetouani, M., Mahdhaoui, A., Saint-Georges, C., Viaux, S., & Cohen, D.
Affiliations
  • Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (FR)
  • Orange (France) (FR)
  • Pitié-Salpêtrière Hospital (FR)
Venue
IEEE Transactions on Affective Computing
Published
2012-07
Volume
3
Issue
3
Pages
349-365
ISSN
1949-3045 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2168676811
Cited by
474
References
144
Citations by year
2026: 35 · 2025: 33 · 2024: 21 · 2023: 49 · 2022: 52 · 2021: 43 · 2020: 36 · 2019: 23 · 2018: 24 · 2017: 26 · 2016: 37 · 2015: 39 · 2014: 28 · 2013: 21 · 2012: 7
FWCI
45.88
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • IEEE Transactions on Affective Computing (publishedVersion)
  • HAL (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • American Heart Association
  • Fondation de France
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Action Observation and Synchronization
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Social Robot Interaction and HRI
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Child and Animal Learning Development
Keywords
interpersonal synchrony, developmental robotics, social robotics, language development, social connectedness

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