Please, read the text (Peter Bull: State of the art: Nonverbal communication) - we will discuss it together in the class.
Dear all, there are three more papers (in Gendron and Barrett only parts about Darwin and Wundt).
Dear all, there are some question to the articles, which you may find helpful.
To Gendron and Barrett:
Is Darwin’s theory of emotions consistent? Support your opinion with arguments.
What are the four main parts of Wundt’s theory of emotions?
To Ekman about Darwin:
What are the five main contributions of Darwin’s theory (according to Ekman)?
What issues are not considered by Darwin (according to Ekman)?
What do you think about the development of different types of body movements and facial expressions by Ekman?
What are the main shifts in Ekman‘s theory (or in collaboration with Friesen)?
In which way Ekman follows Darwin's theory?
To Peter Bulls’s paper:
What do you think about the idea that nonverbal communication may take place even against the express intentions of the encoder. In what situations?
What do you think about the idea that breakthroughs in computer image analysis now hold the promise of fully automated coding? Is it really without possible problems?
What are possible obstacles of expansion of facial expression measurement as a research tool in behavioural science, medicine, psychophysiology etc.?
Is it really important to differentiate between behavioural ecology approach and „hand and facial gestures as parts of natural language“? If not, why is that so?
What do you think about results of experiment mentioned in the firts column on page 646 that „when the video was combined with transcript or with sound, the correlations were actually lower than in the video-only condition, although not significantly so?“
What do you think about following idea? „Because body movement is visual, it is also a silent means of communication. It may be employed when it is difficult or impossible to use speech.“ By contrast – what is an advantage of speaking with regard to gestures/facial expressions/sign language?
reading for session no. 3:
Gendron and Barrett + Ekman about Darwin + Ekman
Try to find some parallels of these approaches (particularly Ekman's) to structure/description of sign languages in general (non-UJKN students can find something on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sign_language)
Dear all (or dear four, if you want :)
please, take into consideration also Intro to ASL Grammar Rules. You can compare it with Ekman' classification of body movements and facial expressions.
Dear all, thank you for your brilliant homeworks. I see a big potential for a theoretically-oriented paper in this topic, we can use our ideas (collect them) and discuss it in the near future (I hope). I also contributed with a few comments, so see the word file attached (with my name). I hope you do not mind that I already collected your comments and made the word file "summary". I hope it could be helpful to see comments of every single participant of our small group ;-)
there are questions to Birdwhistell's Kinesics and context (review by Adam Kendon):
What is the most important contribution of Birdwhistell’s work Kinesics and context?
What is his best innovation (comparing to Darwin or Ekman)? Is there anything similar to Darwin or Ekman?
Do you see any limits in Birdwhistell’s description of communication?
What is the main difference between Birdwhistell’s approach to study of facial expressions and two mentioned experimental approaches?
What do you say on his linguistics analogy in research of nonverbal communication (facial expressions, gestures)? Is that kind of approach useful? And is it consistent from the linguistic viewpoint?
Is there an obvious parallel to the descrption of sign languages in Birdwhistell’s approach? What about the basic distinction to kinemes, kinemorphs and kinemorphic constructions?
What do you think about the concept of “stance“?
What do you think about the Birdwhistell’s book as a whole?
You can decide in the survey (above), if we will discuss these questions in real time or if you prefer to send them in written form via moodle.
Dear all, thank you once more for your excellent homeworks. I also contributed with a few comments, so see the word file attached (with my name). Again, I hope you do not mind that I collected your comments and made the word file "summary".
I was struggling to find something interesting about how to use sign language in the process of therapy of aphasia - results are placed below:
First two links are more general, the third one is particularly dedicated to aphasia.
Please, make a summary (ca 1800 characters) of benefits and possible problems/limits of using sign language in the process of therapy.
And yes - this is the last one!
I am aware of the "official" student evaluation, but please, give me also an "unofficial" feedback what topic have you found useful/interesting and what have you found useless/tedious etc.
Use as many characters as you wish :)
You can use this "task" option or you can e-mail me.