Advertisement

Springer Nature is making SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 research free. View research | View latest news | Sign up for updates

A sociolinguistic indicator of group membership

Abstract

Previous research into the acoustical paralinguistic features of dyadic interview conversations by this author have shown that conversation partners adapt features of their paralinguistic expression to one another, and that this adaptation is continually reconstituted as the conversation proceeds over time. The research reported herein shows that the adaptation phenomenon is also capable of quantitatively and objectively selecting out specific conversations associated with persons who share membership in a consolidated group. It is apparent in this study that members of a consolidated group, in comparison with disparate individuals, engage in a kind of paralinguistic cryptocommunication constitting a code signifying their membership. This form of communication is obviously not consciously known and controlled by conversation partners, for the means of extricating it derives from the employment of several intricate computer routines. In the final portion of this article, prominent competing explanations of the results are discussed. These alternate explanations generally take the form of technical artifacts that offer a more prosaic account of the research results. In order to dispel these looming technical artifactual possibilities, various critical tests are advanced. The results of this research are a substantial and innovative step in the refinement of method and instrumentation to further our understanding of the sociolinguistic binding medium of group membership.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Condon, W. S. & Sander, L. W. (1974). Synchrony demonstrated between movements of the neonate and adult speech,Child Development, 45, 456–462.

  2. Duncan, S., Jr. (1972). Some signals and rules for taking speaking turns in conversation.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 23, 283–292.

  3. Duncan, S., Jr. (1973). Toward a grammar of dyadic conversation.Semiotica, 9, 29–45.

  4. Duncan, S., Jr. (1974). On the structure of speaker-auditor interaction during speaking turns.Language in Society, 2, 161–180.

  5. Durkheim, E. (1964).The division of labor in society, New York: Free Press.

  6. Ekman, P., Friesen, W., & Scherer, W. (1976). Body movement and voice pitch in deceptive interaction.Semiotica, 16, 23–27.

  7. Erickson, F., & Schultz, J. (1982).The counselor as gatekeeper, New York: Academic Press.

  8. Goldman-Eisler, F. (1952). Individual differences between interviewers and their effects on interviewees' conversational behavior.Journal of Mental Science, 98, 660–671.

  9. Gregory, S. W. (1972).Attitudes of airmen on the issue of race. Washington, D.C.: Strategic Research Group, National War College.

  10. Gregory, S. W. (1983). A quantitative analysis of temporal symmetry in microsocial relations.American Sociological Review, 48, 129–135.

  11. Gregory, S. W., & Hoyt, B. R. (1982a). Conversation partner mutual adaptation as demonstrated by Fourier Series analysis.Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 11, 35–46.

  12. Gregory, S. W., & Hoyt, B. R. (1982b).Paralinguistic mutual adaptation by conversation partners. Unpublished manuscript, Kent State University.

  13. Gumperz, J. (1978). Dialect and conversational inference in urban communication.Language in Society, 7, 393–409.

  14. Gumperz, J. (1982).Discourse strategies, London: Cambridge University Press.

  15. Hall, E. T. (1976).Beyond culture, New York: Doubleday.

  16. Hewlett-Packard (1980).9820A Math Pac. Palo alto: Hewlett-Packard Company.

  17. Jaffe, J., & Feldstein, S. (1970).Rhythms of dialogue New York: Academic Press.

  18. Jenkins, G., & Watt, D. G. (1968).Spectral analysis and its applications. San Francisco: Holden-Day.

  19. Labov, W. (1972).Language in the inner city, Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.

  20. Schegloff, E. A. (1968). Sequencing in conversational openings.American Anthropologist, 70, 1075–1095.

  21. Schegloff, E. A. (1979).Repair after next turn: A device for the management of misunderstanding in conversation. Unpublished presentation at the Fourth Annual International Institute for Ethnomethodology and Conversational Analysis, Boston University.

  22. Schwartz, H., & Jacobs, J. (1979).Quanlitative sociology, New York: Free Press.

  23. 3320th Retraining Group. (1971). Statistical report.Lowry Technical Training Center (A.T.C.), United States Air Force, Denver: Lowry Air Force Base.

  24. Warner, R. M. (1979). Periodic rhythms in conversational speech.Language and Speech, 22, 381–396.

  25. Wiener, N. (1971).Cybernetics: Or control and communication in the animal and the machine, Cambridge: M.I.T. Press.

  26. Zerubavel, E. (1977). The French republican calendar: A case study in the sociology of time.American Sociological Review, 42, 868–877.

  27. Zerubavel, e. (1979).Patterns of time in hospital life. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

  28. Zerubavel, E. (1981).Hidden rhythms. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

  29. Zerubavel, E. (1982). Calendars and group identity.American Sociological Review, 47, 284–289.

Download references

Author information

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Gregory, S.W. A sociolinguistic indicator of group membership. J Psycholinguist Res 15, 189–207 (1986). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01067454

Download citation

Keywords

  • Cognitive Psychology
  • Research Result
  • Alternate Explanation
  • Group Membership
  • Critical Test