Turn Taking versus Discourse Structure

  • J. Cassell
  • O. E. Torres
  • S. Prevost
Part of the The Springer International Series in Engineering and Computer Science book series (SECS, volume 511)


The Turing test has always been conceived of as a test of the content of a computer’s contribution to a conversation. That is, from typed output, we are supposed to try to tell whether text was generated by a human or a computer. Recent advances in speech technology have led us to conceive of a Turing test taken over the phone. What about a face-to-face Turing test? What kinds of behaviors would a computer have to exhibit to convince us that it was not a grey box but a living, breathing body? We are perhaps not ready today for such a competition, but7 we may be one day. This paper attempts to move the field of human-computer conversation in that direction—in the direction of embodied dialogue with computers. In other work (Cassell et al., 1994; Cassell and Thórisson, in press), we have concentrated on hand gestures, intonation, head movement, and gaze. The current work revisits the question of gaze and attempts to reconcile two competing approaches to the general question of generating nonverbal behaviors.


Hand Gesture Nonverbal Behavior Propositional Content Discourse Structure Dialogue System 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Cassell, J., Pelachaud, C., Badler, N.I., Steedman, M., Achorn, B., Beckett, T., Douville, B., Prevost, S. and Stone, M. 1994. “Animated Conversation: Rule-Based Generation of Facial Expression, Gesture and Spoken Intonation for Multiple Conversational Agents.” Computer Graphics 94.Google Scholar
  2. Cassell, J. and S. Prevost. (in preparation). “Embodied Natural Language Generation: A Framework for Generating Speech and Gesture.”Google Scholar
  3. Cassell, J. and Thôrisson, K. (in press). “The Power of a Nod and a Glance: Envelope vs. Emotional Feedback in Animated Conversation Agents.” Journal of Applied Artificial Intelligence.Google Scholar
  4. Duncan, S. Jr. 1972. “Some Signals and Rules for Taking Speaking Turns in Conversations.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 23 (2), 283–292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Duncan, S. Jr. 1974. “On the Structure of Speaker-Auditor Interaction during Speaking Turns.” Language in Society, 3 (2), 161–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Goodwin, C. 1981. Conversational Organization: Interaction between Hearers and Speakers. Academic Press. New York, NY.Google Scholar
  7. Halliday, M. 1967. Intonation and Grammar in British English. Mouton: The Hague.Google Scholar
  8. Luff, P., Gilbert N., Frohlich, D., eds. 1990. Computers and Conversation.: Academic Press. New York, NY.Google Scholar
  9. Pelachaud, C., Badler N. and Steedman, M. 1996. “Generating Facial Expressions for Speech.” Cognitive Science, 20 (1).Google Scholar
  10. Prevost, S. 1996. “An Information Structural Approach to Spoken Language Generation.” Proceedings of the 34th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics.Google Scholar
  11. Sacks, H. 1992. Lectures on Conversation, Vol. I and II.: Blackwell. Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  12. Sacks, H., Schegloff, E.A. and Jefferson, G.A. 1974. “A Simplest Systematics for the Organization of Turn-Taking in Conversation.” Language, 50, 696–735.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Takeuchi, A. and Nagao, K. 1993. “Communicative Facial Displays as a New Conversational Modality.” Proceedings of InterCHi 93.Google Scholar
  14. Th6risson, K.R. 1997. “Gandalf: An Embodied Humanoid Capable of Real-Time Multimodal Dialogue with People.” Autonomous Agents 97.Google Scholar
  15. Whittaker, S. and Stenton, P. 1988. “Cues and Control in Expert-Client Dialogues.” Proceedings of the 26th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics.Google Scholar
  16. Vallduvi, E. 1990. “The Informational Component.” PhD thesis, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1999

Authors and Affiliations

  • J. Cassell
  • O. E. Torres
  • S. Prevost

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations