The DOI matches its OpenAlex record; 7 of the 7 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Chameleons in imagined conversations: A new approach to understanding coordination of linguistic style in dialogs
Open accessOverview
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
Toward a mechanistic psychology of dialogue.
Pickering, M. J., & Garrod, S. (2004) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x04000056 · Cited by 2,678
Syntactic persistence in language production
Bock, J. K. (1986) · Cognitive Psychology · doi:10.1016/0010-0285(86)90004-6 · Cited by 1,911
Using linguistic cues for the automatic recognition of personality in conversation and text
Mairesse, F., Walker, M. A., Mehl, M. R., & Moore, R. K. (2007) · Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research · doi:10.1613/jair.2349 · Cited by 1,046
Lakin, J. L., Jefferis, V. E., Cheng, C. M., & Chartrand, T. L. (2003) · Journal of Nonverbal Behavior · doi:10.1023/a:1025389814290 · Cited by 960
Language style matching in writing: synchrony in essays, correspondence, and poetry.
Ireland, M. E., & Pennebaker, J. W. (2010) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/a0020386 · Cited by 380
Does computer-generated speech manifest personality? an experimental test of similarity-attraction
Nass, C., & Lee, K. M. (2000) · Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/332040.332452 · Cited by 242
Applied Bayesian and Classical Inference
Mosteller, F., & Wallace, D. L. (1984) · Springer Series in Statistics · doi:10.1007/978-1-4612-5256-6 · Cited by 195
Cited by
A Literature Survey of Recent Advances in Chatbots
Caldarini, G., Jaf, S., & McGarry, K. (2022) · Information · doi:10.3390/info13010041 · Cited by 470
Deep Reinforcement Learning for Sequence-to-Sequence Models
Keneshloo, Y., Shi, T., Ramakrishnan, N., & Reddy, C. K. (2019) · IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks and Learning Systems · doi:10.1109/tnnls.2019.2929141 · Cited by 230
Mental Health Support and its Relationship to Linguistic Accommodation in Online Communities
Sharma, E., & De Choudhury, M. (2018) · Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3173574.3174215 · Cited by 156
Way Off-Policy Batch Deep Reinforcement Learning of Implicit Human Preferences in Dialog
Jaques, N., Ghandeharioun, A., Shen, J. H., Ferguson, C., Lapedriza, A., Jones, N., Gu, S., & Picard, R. (2019) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1907.00456 · Cited by 126
Auditing Data Provenance in Text-Generation Models
Song, C., & Shmatikov, V. (2019) · Proceedings of the 25th ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery & Data Mining · doi:10.1145/3292500.3330885 · Cited by 103
Metadata
- Authors
- Danescu-Niculescu-Mizil, C., & Lee, L.
- Venue
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- Publisher
- Cornell University
- Published
- 2011-06-15
- Pages
- 76-87
- ISSN
- 2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
- arXiv
- 1106.3077
- OpenAlex
- W2125320996
- Cited by
- 312
- References
- 7
- Type
- posted content
- 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: Chameleons in imagined conversations: A new approach to understanding coordination of linguistic style in dialogs. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.48550/arxiv.1106.3077
- The paper
- Danescu-Niculescu-Mizil, C., & Lee, L. (2011). Chameleons in imagined conversations: A new approach to understanding coordination of linguistic style in dialogs. arXiv (Cornell University). https://doi.org/10.48550/arxiv.1106.3077
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.
