1887
  1. Home
  2. e-Journals
  3. Interaction Studies
  4. Volume 26, Issue 1
  5. Article
Volume 26, Issue 1
  • ISSN 1572-0373
  • E-ISSN: 1572-0381
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

One of the characteristics of dialogue is that interlocutors tend to converge on the same linguistic choices, called alignment. In this paper, we aim to investigate whether structural alignment — the tendency to use the same syntactic structures — has a positive effect on cognitive load and task completion in a task-based conversation. To do so, we engage participants in a collaborative task where they have to interact with another interlocutor (actually a bot) and inform each other about the location of landmarks on a map. In one condition the bot aligns with the participant and in the other it does not. Participants are recorded with an eye tracker during the experiment so that we can evaluate cognitive load and performance in the task. We found that when participants interact with an aligning bot, their cognitive load decreases and task completion is facilitated, but only to a certain degree. The results of the study suggest that alignment is a strategy that can be used in order to facilitate task performance.

© 2025 John Benjamins Publishing Company
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/is.24029.pla
2026-01-09
2026-01-13

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1075/is.24029.pla
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Anderson, A. H., Bader, M., Bard, E. G., Boyle, E., Doherty, G., Garrod, S., Isard, S., Kowtko, J., McAllister, J., Miller, J., Sotillo, C., Thompson, H. S., & Weinert, R.
    (1991) The Hcrc Map Task Corpus. Language and Speech, 34(4), 351–366. 10.1177/002383099103400404
     https://doi.org/10.1177/002383099103400404 [Google Scholar]
  2. Balcetis, E., & Dale, R.
    (2005) An Exploration of Social Modulation of Syntactic Priming. https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:14839111
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Baumann, A., Matzinger, T., Mühlenbernd, R., Wacewicz, S., Pleyer, M., Hartmann, S., & Placiński, M.
    (2024) The role of linguistically encoded emotional characteristics for cooperativeness in a one-shot Prisoner’s Dilemma. InJ. Nölle, L. Raviv, K. E. Graham, S. Hartmann, Y. Jadoul, M. Josserand, T. Matzinger, K. Mudd, M. Pleyer, A. Slonimska, S. Wacewicz, & S. Watson (Eds.), The Evolution of Language: Proceedings of the 15th International Conference (Evolang XV). 10.17617/2.3587960
     https://doi.org/10.17617/2.3587960 [Google Scholar]
  4. Beatty, J.
    (1982) Task-evoked pupillary responses, processing load, and the structure of processing resources. Psychological Bulletin, 9121, 276–292. 10.1037/0033‑2909.91.2.276
     https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.91.2.276 [Google Scholar]
  5. Bock, J. K.
    (1986) Syntactic persistence in language production. Cognitive Psychology, 18(3), 355–387. 10.1016/0010‑0285(86)90004‑6
     https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0285(86)90004-6 [Google Scholar]
  6. Branigan, H. P., Pickering, M. J., & Cleland, A. A.
    (2000) Syntactic co-ordination in dialogue. Cognition, 751, B13–B25. 10.1016/S0010‑0277(99)00081‑5
     https://doi.org/10.1016/S0010-0277(99)00081-5 [Google Scholar]
  7. Branigan, H. P., Pickering, M. J., Pearson, J., & McLean, J. F.
    (2010) Linguistic alignment between people and computers. Journal of Pragmatics, 42(9), 2355–2368. 10.1016/j.pragma.2009.12.012
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2009.12.012 [Google Scholar]
  8. Branigan, H. P., Pickering, M. J., Pearson, J., McLean, J. F., & Brown, A.
    (2011) The role of beliefs in lexical alignment: Evidence from dialogs with humans and computers. Cognition, 121(1), 41–57. 10.1016/j.cognition.2011.05.011
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2011.05.011 [Google Scholar]
  9. Brennan, S. E., & Clark, H. H.
    (1996) Conceptual pacts and lexical choice in conversation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 22(6), 1482–1493. 10.1037/0278‑7393.22.6.1482
     https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.22.6.1482 [Google Scholar]
  10. Clark, H. H.
    (1996) Using Language. Cambridge University Press. https://books.google.pl/books?id=DiWBGOP-YnoC. 10.1017/CBO9780511620539
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511620539 [Google Scholar]
  11. Danescu-Niculescu-Mizil, C., Lee, L., Pang, B., & Kleinberg, J.
    (2012) Echoes of power: Language effects and power differences in social interaction. Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on World Wide Web, 699–708. 10.1145/2187836.2187931
     https://doi.org/10.1145/2187836.2187931 [Google Scholar]
  12. Duran, N. D., Paige, A., & D’Mello, S. K.
    (2024) Multi-Level Linguistic Alignment in a Dynamic Collaborative Problem-Solving Task. Cognitive Science, 48(1), e13398. 10.1111/cogs.13398
     https://doi.org/10.1111/cogs.13398 [Google Scholar]
  13. Durugbo, C. M.
    (2021) Eye tracking for work-related visual search: A cognitive task analysis. Ergonomics, 64(2), 225–240. 10.1080/00140139.2020.1822547
     https://doi.org/10.1080/00140139.2020.1822547 [Google Scholar]
  14. Ferreira, V. S., & Bock, K.
    (2006) The functions of structural priming. Language and Cognitive Processes, 211, 1011–1029. 10.1080/01690960600824609
     https://doi.org/10.1080/01690960600824609 [Google Scholar]
  15. Ferreira, V. S., & Yoshita, H.
    (2003) Given-New Ordering Effects on the Production of Scrambled Sentences in Japanese. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 32(6), 669–692. 10.1023/A:1026146332132
     https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1026146332132 [Google Scholar]
  16. Fine, A. B., & Florian Jaeger, T.
    (2013) Evidence for Implicit Learning in Syntactic Comprehension. Cognitive Science, 37(3), 578–591. 10.1111/cogs.12022
     https://doi.org/10.1111/cogs.12022 [Google Scholar]
  17. Foltz, A., Gaspers, J., Meyer, C., Thiele, K., Cimiano, P., & Stenneken, P.
    (2015) Temporal Effects of Alignment in Text-Based, Task-Oriented Discourse. Discourse Processes, 52(8), 609–641. 10.1080/0163853X.2014.977696
     https://doi.org/10.1080/0163853X.2014.977696 [Google Scholar]
  18. Fusaroli, R., Bahrami, B., Olsen, K., Roepstorff, A., Rees, G., Frith, C., & Tylén, K.
    (2012) Coming to Terms: Quantifying the Benefits of Linguistic Coordination. Psychological Science, 23(8), 931–939. 10.1177/0956797612436816
     https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797612436816 [Google Scholar]
  19. Garrod, S., & Anderson, A.
    (1987) Saying what you mean in dialogue: A study in conceptual and semantic co-ordination. Cognition, 271, 181–218. 10.1016/0010‑0277(87)90018‑7
     https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(87)90018-7 [Google Scholar]
  20. Giles, H., & Powesland, P. F.
    (1975) Speech style and social evaluation. Speech Style and Social Evaluation, viii1, 218–viii, 218.
     [Google Scholar]
  21. Godfrey, J. J., Holliman, E. C., & McDaniel, J.
    (1992) SWITCHBOARD: telephone speech corpus for research and development. Proceedings of the 1992 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing — Volume 1, 517–520. 10.1109/ICASSP.1992.225858
     https://doi.org/10.1109/ICASSP.1992.225858 [Google Scholar]
  22. Gries, S. Th.
    (2005) Syntactic Priming: A Corpus-based Approach. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 34(4), 365–399. 10.1007/s10936‑005‑6139‑3
     https://doi.org/10.1007/s10936-005-6139-3 [Google Scholar]
  23. Gumussoy, Cigdem, Altin, A. E. B., Aycan Pekpazar, Mustafa Esengun, & Ince, G.
    (2022) Usability Evaluation of TV Interfaces: Subjective Evaluation Vs. Objective Evaluation. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 38(7), 661–679. 10.1080/10447318.2021.1960093
     https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2021.1960093 [Google Scholar]
  24. Hartsuiker, R. J., & Kolk, H. H. J.
    (1998) Syntactic persistence in Dutch. Language and Speech, 41(2), 143–184.
     [Google Scholar]
  25. Holler, J., & Levinson, S. C.
    (2019) Multimodal Language Processing in Human Communication. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 23(8), 639–652. 10.1016/j.tics.2019.05.006
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2019.05.006 [Google Scholar]
  26. Horstmann, N., Ahlgrimm, A., & Glöckner, A.
    (2009) How distinct are intuition and deliberation? An eye-tracking analysis of instruction-induced decision modes. Judgment and Decision Making, 4(5), 335–354. 10.1017/S1930297500001182
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S1930297500001182 [Google Scholar]
  27. Huang, J., Liu, X., Lu, M., Sun, Y., Wang, S., Branigan, H. P., & Pickering, M. J.
    (2023) The head constituent plays a key role in the lexical boost in syntactic priming. Journal of Memory and Language, 1311, 104416. 10.1016/j.jml.2023.104416
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2023.104416 [Google Scholar]
  28. Ivanova, I., Branigan, H., McLean, J., Costa, A., & Pickering, M.
    (2021) Lexical Alignment to Non-native Speakers. Dialogue & Discourse, 121, 145–173. 10.5210/dad.2021.205
     https://doi.org/10.5210/dad.2021.205 [Google Scholar]
  29. Jaeger, T. F., & Snider, N.
    (2007) Implicit Learning and Syntactic Persistence: Surprisal and Cumulativity. https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:10764673
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Jaeger, T. F., & Snider, N. E.
    (2013) Alignment as a consequence of expectation adaptation: Syntactic priming is affected by the prime’s prediction error given both prior and recent experience. Cognition, 127(1), 57–83. 10.1016/j.cognition.2012.10.013
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2012.10.013 [Google Scholar]
  31. Kantola, L., Gompel, R. P. G. van, & Wakeford, L. J.
    (2023) The head or the verb: Is the lexical boost restricted to the head verb?Journal of Memory and Language, 1291, 104388. 10.1016/j.jml.2022.104388
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2022.104388 [Google Scholar]
  32. Karkowska, K., Namednikava, D., Placiński, M., Pleyer, M., & Matzinger, T.
    (2024) The relationship between non-verbal alignment and cooperativeness in a game theory-based TV show. InProceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society (Vol.461).
     [Google Scholar]
  33. Krejtz, K., Duchowski, A. T., Niedzielska, A., Biele, C., & Krejtz, I.
    (2018) Eye tracking cognitive load using pupil diameter and microsaccades with fixed gaze. PLOS ONE, 13(9), 1–23. 10.1371/journal.pone.0203629
     https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0203629 [Google Scholar]
  34. Kulesza, W., Dolinski, D., Huisman, A., & Majewski, R.
    (2014) The Echo Effect: The Power of Verbal Mimicry to Influence Prosocial Behavior. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 33(2), 183–201. 10.1177/0261927X13506906
     https://doi.org/10.1177/0261927X13506906 [Google Scholar]
  35. Lev-Ari, S., & Peperkamp, S.
    (2017) Language for $200: Success in the environment influences grammatical alignment. Journal of Language Evolution, 2(2), 177–187. 10.1093/jole/lzw012
     https://doi.org/10.1093/jole/lzw012 [Google Scholar]
  36. Levinson, S. C., & Torreira, F.
    (2015) Timing in turn-taking and its implications for processing models of language. Frontiers in Psychology, 61. 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00731
     https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00731 [Google Scholar]
  37. Mahowald, K., James, A., Futrell, R., & Gibson, E.
    (2016) A meta-analysis of syntactic priming in language production. New Approaches to Structural Priming, 911, 5–27. 10.1016/j.jml.2016.03.009
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2016.03.009 [Google Scholar]
  38. Matzinger, T., Placiński, M., Gutowski, A., Lewandowski, M., Żywiczyński, P., & Wacewicz, S.
    (2024) Inherent linguistic preference outcompetes incidental alignment in cooperative partner choice. Language and Cognition, 16(4), 1834–1851. 10.1017/langcog.2024.27
     https://doi.org/10.1017/langcog.2024.27 [Google Scholar]
  39. Partan, S. R., & Marler, P.
    (2005) Issues in the Classification of Multimodal Communication Signals. The American Naturalist, 166(2), 231–245. 10.1086/431246
     https://doi.org/10.1086/431246 [Google Scholar]
  40. Pickering, M. J., & Branigan, H. P.
    (1998) The Representation of Verbs: Evidence from Syntactic Priming in Language Production. Journal of Memory and Language, 391, 633–651. 10.1006/jmla.1998.2592
     https://doi.org/10.1006/jmla.1998.2592 [Google Scholar]
  41. Pickering, M. J., & Garrod, S.
    (2004) Toward a mechanistic psychology of dialogue. The Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 27(2), 169–190; discussion190–226. 10.1017/S0140525X04000056
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X04000056 [Google Scholar]
  42. (2006) Alignment as the Basis for Successful Communication. Research on Language and Computation, 4(2), 203–228. 10.1007/s11168‑006‑9004‑0
     https://doi.org/10.1007/s11168-006-9004-0 [Google Scholar]
  43. Placiński, M.
    (2019) Interactive alignment in Polish: A CMC-based study. Beyond Philology An International Journal of Linguistics, Literary Studies and English Language Teaching, (16/1), 45–76. 10.26881/bp.2019.1.03
     https://doi.org/10.26881/bp.2019.1.03 [Google Scholar]
  44. Placiński, M., & Żywiczyński, P.
    (2023) Modality effect in interactive alignment: Differences between spoken and text-based conversation. Lingua, 2931, 103592. 10.1016/j.lingua.2023.103592
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2023.103592 [Google Scholar]
  45. Placiński, M., Matzinger, T., Baumann, A., Żywiczyński, P., Hartmann, S., Boehm, I., Pleyer, M., & Wacewicz, S.
    (2024) Does syntactic alignment predict cooperation? A corpus study of the prisoner’s dilemma. The Evolution of Language Conferences.
     [Google Scholar]
  46. Rasenberg, M., Özyürek, A., & Dingemanse, M.
    (2020) Alignment in Multimodal Interaction: An Integrative Framework. Cognitive Science, 44(11), e12911. 10.1111/cogs.12911
     https://doi.org/10.1111/cogs.12911 [Google Scholar]
  47. (2022) The Primacy of Multimodal Alignment in Converging on Shared Symbols for Novel Referents. Discourse Processes, 59(3), 209–236. 10.1080/0163853X.2021.1992235
     https://doi.org/10.1080/0163853X.2021.1992235 [Google Scholar]
  48. Reitter, D., & Moore, J. D.
    (2014) Alignment and task success in spoken dialogue. Journal of Memory and Language, 761, 29–46. 10.1016/j.jml.2014.05.008
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2014.05.008 [Google Scholar]
  49. Sacks, H., Schegloff, E. A., & Jefferson, G.
    (1974) A Simplest Systematics for the Organization of Turn-Taking for Conversation. Language, 50(4), 696–735. 10.1353/lan.1974.0010
     https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.1974.0010 [Google Scholar]
  50. Scheepers, C., & Corley, M.
    (2000) Syntactic priming in German sentence production. InL. R. Gleitman & A. K. Joshi (Eds.), Proceedings of the 22nd Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp.435–440). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
     [Google Scholar]
  51. Schoot, L., Hagoort, P., & Segaert, K.
    (2019) Stronger Syntactic Alignment in the Presence of an Interlocutor. Frontiers in Psychology, 101, 685. 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00685
     https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00685 [Google Scholar]
  52. Segaert, K., Kempen, G., Petersson, K. M., & Hagoort, P.
    (2013) Syntactic priming and the lexical boost effect during sentence production and sentence comprehension: An fMRI study. Brain and Language, 124(2), 174–183. 10.1016/j.bandl.2012.12.003
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandl.2012.12.003 [Google Scholar]
  53. Simonovic, B., Stupple, E. J. N., Gale, M., & Sheffield, D.
    (2018) Performance Under Stress: An Eye-Tracking Investigation of the Iowa Gambling Task (IGT). Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience, Volume 12–2018. 10.3389/fnbeh.2018.00217
     https://doi.org/10.3389/fnbeh.2018.00217 [Google Scholar]
  54. Szmrecsanyi, B.
    (2006) Morphosyntactic persistence in spoken English: A corpus study at the intersection of variationist sociolinguistics, psycholinguistics, and discourse analysis. Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110197808
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110197808 [Google Scholar]
  55. Tobar-Henríquez, A., Rabagliati, H., & Branigan, H. P.
    (2021) Speakers extrapolate community-level knowledge from individual linguistic encounters. Cognition, 2101, 104602. 10.1016/j.cognition.2021.104602
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2021.104602 [Google Scholar]
  56. Tooley, K. M., Pickering, M. J., & Traxler, M. J.
    (2019) Lexically-mediated syntactic priming effects in comprehension: Sources of facilitation. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 72(9), 2176–2196. 10.1177/1747021819834247
     https://doi.org/10.1177/1747021819834247 [Google Scholar]
  57. Traxler, M. J.
    (2015) Priming of Early Closure: Evidence for the Lexical Boost during Sentence Comprehension. Language, cognition and neuroscience, 30(4), 478–490. 10.1080/23273798.2014.933243
     https://doi.org/10.1080/23273798.2014.933243 [Google Scholar]
  58. Traxler, M. J., Tooley, K. M., & Pickering, M. J.
    (2014) Syntactic priming during sentence comprehension: Evidence for the lexical boost. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 40(4), 905.
     [Google Scholar]
  59. van Baaren, R. B.
    (2005) The Parrot Effect: How to Increase Tip Size: How to Increase Tip Size. Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly, 46(1), 79–84. 10.1177/0010880404270062
     https://doi.org/10.1177/0010880404270062 [Google Scholar]
  60. Velichkovsky, B. M., Challis, B. H., & Pomplun, M.
    (1995) Working memory and work with memory: Visual-spatial and further components of processing. Zeitschrift fur experimentelle Psychologie : Organ der Deutschen Gesellschaft fur Psychologie, 42(4), 672–701.
     [Google Scholar]
  61. Weatherholtz, K., Campbell-Kibler, K., & Jaeger, T. F.
    (2014) Socially-mediated syntactic alignment. Language Variation and Change, 26(3), 387–420. 10.1017/S0954394514000155
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954394514000155 [Google Scholar]
  62. Zwaan, R. A., & Radvansky, G. A.
    (1998) Situation models in language comprehension and memory. Psychological Bulletin, 123(2), 162–185. 10.1037/0033‑2909.123.2.162
     https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.123.2.162 [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1075/is.24029.pla
Loading
Structural alignment leads to lower cognitive load in a collaborative task
Interaction Studies 26, 102 (2025); https://doi.org/10.1075/is.24029.pla
/content/journals/10.1075/is.24029.pla
/content/journals/10.1075/is.24029.pla
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): eye tracking; structural alignment; task-oriented dialogue

Most Cited

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error