Empirical examination of cooperation, effort and risk in task-oriented dialogue
dc.contributor.author
Davies, Bethan L.
en
dc.date.accessioned
2016-12-06T10:19:09Z
dc.date.available
2016-12-06T10:19:09Z
dc.date.issued
1997
dc.description.abstract
This thesis presents a discussion of proposed structuring principles for dialogue,
and tests them empirically using data from the HCRC Map Task Corpus.
The concepts of Cooperation (as described by Grice, and as used more generally
in Linguistics), Coordination, Collaboration, Parsimony, Risk and Effort are ex¬
amined, and empirically testable hypotheses are developed, with which we are
able to evaluate the claims for these principles in the context of task-oriented
dialogue.
In order to test our hypotheses, we categorise the utterances in our database in
terms of Risk and Effort. Unlike Discourse Analysis, Conversation Analysis or
Dialogue Games, our approach is evaluative. The intent in our dialogue coding
is not only to label what the speakers did, but also to assess it in terms of its
appropriateness at that point in the dialogue: the system codes not only what
people do, but also what they don't do. Therefore, our system marks both the
presence and absence of dialogue attributes.
The hypotheses derived from the structuring concepts were statistically tested on
the data produced by the coding system. The results produced by the empiri¬
cal tests showed a relationship between dialogue errors and task errors, but not
between increased effort and increased task success. The importance of matched
effort was also demonstrated, as dialogue pairs who invested similar amounts of
effort produced better task results. Dialogue pairs also produced better results
over time, which we argue is due to the focusing of effort. Participants work
out where their effort should be channelled so that they can increase risk-taking
where problems have not occurred, and decrease risk-taking where problems have
occurred.
These results suggest that interactants' behaviour follows a Principle of Least
Individual Effort, which we argue subsumes the Principle of Parsimony and thus
the Risk-Effort Trade-Olf. We reject the Principle of Least Collaborative Effort
because although the empirical result of high effort not being associated with
task success supports this principle in theory, we argue that its motivation is not
supported in practice.
The empirical work also distinguishes between what we term 'Gricean Coop¬
eration', and folklinguistic notions of Cooperation found in the literature. In
general terms, Gricean Cooperation predicted the same type of effort-minimising
behaviour as the Principle of Least Individual Effort, and was thus supported
by the empirical work. However, the concept of 'helpfulness' suggested by more
general uses of Cooperation made predictions which were in conflict with those
of the Principle of Least Individual Effort, and were found not to be supported.
en
dc.identifier.uri
http://hdl.handle.net/1842/18133
dc.publisher
The University of Edinburgh
en
dc.relation.ispartof
Annexe Thesis Digitisation Project 2016 Block 5
en
dc.relation.isreferencedby
Already catalogued
en
dc.title
Empirical examination of cooperation, effort and risk in task-oriented dialogue
en
dc.type
Thesis or Dissertation
en
dc.type.qualificationlevel
Doctoral
en
dc.type.qualificationname
PhD Doctor of Philosophy
en
Files
Original bundle
1 - 1 of 1
- Name:
- DaviesBL_1997redux.pdf
- Size:
- 35.84 MB
- Format:
- Adobe Portable Document Format
This item appears in the following Collection(s)

