AMAB: Automated measurement and analysis of body motion
- 618 Downloads
Technologies that measure human nonverbal behavior have existed for some time, and their use in the analysis of social behavior has become more popular following the development of sensor technologies that record full-body movement. However, a standardized methodology to efficiently represent and analyze full-body motion is absent. In this article, we present automated measurement and analysis of body motion (AMAB), a methodology for examining individual and interpersonal nonverbal behavior from the output of full-body motion tracking systems. We address the recording, screening, and normalization of the data, providing methods for standardizing the data across recording condition and across subject body sizes. We then propose a series of dependent measures to operationalize common research questions in psychological research. We present practical examples from several application areas to demonstrate the efficacy of our proposed method for full-body measurements and comparisons across time, space, body parts, and subjects.
KeywordsMotion capture Human motion analysis Measurement of body motion Body motion analysis
The authors acknowledge financial support from the Dutch programme COMMIT and from the EU FP7 network of excellence SSPNet.
- Bezodis, N. E., Salo, A. I. T., & Trewartha, G. (2010). Choice of sprint start performance measure affects the performance-based ranking within a group of sprinters: Which is the most appropriate measure? Sports Biomechanics, 9, 258–269. doi: 10.1080/14763141.2010.538713 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Doron, C., Beattie, G., & Shovelton, S. (2010). Nonverbal indicators of deception: How iconic gestures reveal thoughts that cannot be suppressed. Semiotica, 133–174. doi: 10.1515/semi.2010.055
- Ekman, P. (1965). Communication through nonverbal behavior: A source of information about an interpersonal relationship. In S. S. Tomkins & C. Izard (Eds.), Affect, cognition, and personality (pp. 390–442). New York: Springer.Google Scholar
- Feese, S., Arnrich, B., Tröster, G., Meyer, B., & Jonas, K. (2012). Quantifying behavioral mimicry by automatic detection of nonverbal cues from body motion. In A. Nijholt, A. Vinciarelli, B. Schüller, & M. Smith (Eds.), International conference on social computing (pp. 520–525). Piscataway, NJ: IEEE. doi: 10.1109/SocialCom-PASSAT.2012.48 Google Scholar
- Frey, S., & Von Cranach, M. (1973). A method for the assessment of body movement variability. In M. von Cranach & I. Vine (Eds.), Social communication and movement (pp. 389–418). New York, NY: Academic.Google Scholar
- Hall, E. T. (1966). The hidden dimension. New York, NY: Doubleday.Google Scholar
- Hirsbrunner, H. P., Frey, S., & Crawford, R. (1987). Movement in human interaction: Description, parameter formation, and analysis. In A. Siegman & S. Feldstein (Eds.), Nonverbal behavior and communication (pp. 99–140). Hillside, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Assocates.Google Scholar
- McNeill, D. (1992). Hand and mind: What gestures reveal about thought. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
- Scherer, K. R., & Ekman, P. (1982). Methodological issues in studying nonverbal behavior. In K. R. Scherer & P. Ekman (Eds.), Handbook of methods in nonverbal behavior research (pp. 45–135). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- Vick, S. J., Waller, B. M., Parr, L. A., Smith Pasqualini, M. C., & Bard, K. A. (2006). A cross-species comparison of facial morphology and movement in humans and chimpanzees using the Facial Action Coding System (FACS)". Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 31, 1–20. doi: 10.1007/s10919-006-0017-z CrossRefGoogle Scholar