The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
CONVERSATION ACTS IN TASK‐ORIENTED SPOKEN DIALOGUE
Open accessAbstract
A linguistic form's compositional, timeless meaning can be surrounded or even contradicted by various social, aesthetic, or analogistic companion meanings. This paper addresses a series of problems in the structure of spoken language discourse, including turn‐taking and grounding. It views these processes as composed of fine‐grained actions, which resemble speech acts both in resulting from a computational mechanism of planning and in having a rich relationship to the specific linguistic features which serve to indicate their presence. The resulting notion of Conversation Acts is more general than speech act theory, encompassing not only the traditional speech acts but turn‐taking, grounding, and higher‐level argumentation acts as well. Furthermore, the traditional speech acts in this scheme become fully joint actions, whose successful performance requires full listener participation. This paper presents a detailed analysis of spoken language dialogue. It shows the role of each class of conversation acts in discourse structure, and discusses how each class can be processed and recognized. Conversation acts, it will be seen, better account for the success of conversation than speech act theory alone. They also provide a pragmatic view of meaning in which the literal/non‐literal distinction is simply irrelevant.
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
The Preference for Self-Correction in the Organization of Repair in Conversation
Schegloff, E. A., Jefferson, G., & Sacks, H. (1977) · Language · doi:10.2307/413107 · Cited by 5,150
Cited by
Inter-Coder Agreement for Computational Linguistics
Artstein, R., & Poesio, M. (2008) · Computational Linguistics · doi:10.1162/coli.07-034-r2 · Cited by 1,665
MultiWOZ - A Large-Scale Multi-Domain Wizard-of-Oz Dataset for Task-Oriented Dialogue Modelling
Budzianowski, P., Wen, T.-H., Tseng, B.-H., Casanueva, I., Ultes, S., Ramadan, O., & Gašić, M. (2018) · Proceedings of the 2018 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing · doi:10.18653/v1/d18-1547 · Cited by 1,028
Information state and dialogue management in the TRINDI dialogue move engine toolkit
LARSSON, S., & TRAUM, D. R. (2000) · Natural Language Engineering · doi:10.1017/s1351324900002539 · Cited by 465
Self-citationExploring the Role of Conversational Cues in Guided Task Support with Virtual Assistants
Vtyurina, A., & Fourney, A. (2018) · Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3173574.3173782 · Cited by 83
The Next Step towards a Function Markup Language
Heylen, D., Kopp, S., Marsella, S. C., Pelachaud, C., & Vilhjálmsson, H. (2008) · Lecture Notes in Computer Science · doi:10.1007/978-3-540-85483-8_28 · Cited by 70
Metadata
- Authors
- Traum, D. R., & Hinkelman, E. A.
- Venue
- Computational Intelligence
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1992-08
- Volume
- 8
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 575-599
- ISSN
- 0824-7935 (ISSN-L)
- 1467-8640
- OpenAlex
- W2148249921
- Cited by
- 229
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 6.26
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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: CONVERSATION ACTS IN TASK‐ORIENTED SPOKEN DIALOGUE. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1467-8640.1992.tb00380.x
- The paper
- Traum, D. R., & Hinkelman, E. A. (1992). CONVERSATION ACTS IN TASK‐ORIENTED SPOKEN DIALOGUE. Computational Intelligence. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8640.1992.tb00380.x
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.