arxiv: 2604.15322 · v1 · submitted 2026-03-03 · 💻 cs.HC · cs.CL· cs.LG

Recognition: no theorem link

Acoustic and Facial Markers of Perceived Conversational Success in Spontaneous Speech

Thanushi Withanage , Elizabeth Redcay , Carol Espy-Wilson

Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-15 16:17 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 💻 cs.HC cs.CLcs.LG

keywords entrainmentspontaneous speechconversational successmultimodal featuresdyadic conversationsperceived interaction qualityZoomfactor analysis

0 comments

The pith

Entrainment in spontaneous Zoom conversations correlates with higher perceived success.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper examines alignment of speaking patterns, called entrainment, in natural non-task virtual dialogues rather than scripted ones. It pulls out features from turn-taking, pauses, facial movements, and acoustics such as pitch and intensity across a large set of dyadic Zoom talks. Perceived success is measured by factor analysis applied to participants' post-conversation ratings. The central result is that this entrainment appears reliably and tracks with ratings of better interaction quality. A sympathetic reader would care because the work supplies measurable markers for conversational quality that could guide real-world communication support.

Core claim

In a corpus of spontaneous dyadic Zoom conversations, multimodal entrainment features encompassing turn-taking, pauses, facial movements, and acoustic measures such as pitch and intensity were found to correlate with higher perceived conversational success as quantified by factor analysis of post-conversation ratings.

What carries the argument

Entrainment, the alignment of speaking patterns between interlocutors, detected through multimodal features including turn-taking, pauses, facial movements, and acoustic measures such as pitch and intensity.

If this is right

Entrainment can serve as a detectable marker for assessing quality in virtual spontaneous interactions.
Multimodal features such as pitch alignment and turn-taking patterns contribute to the observed correlation with success ratings.
The findings point to opportunities for interventions that target these specific interactional markers to improve communication.
The approach extends prior entrainment work from task-oriented dialogues to naturalistic non-task settings.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

Real-time monitoring of these entrainment markers could be tested in live video systems to provide immediate conversational feedback.
The correlation might weaken or change when the same conversations occur in person rather than on video, offering a direct test of medium effects.
Facial movement features could be compared against purely acoustic ones to determine which modality drives the success link most strongly.

Load-bearing premise

Post-conversation self-ratings processed via factor analysis validly and reliably quantify perceived conversational success without confounding influences.

What would settle it

A dataset of spontaneous conversations where factor-analyzed ratings indicate high success but no detectable alignment appears in the extracted turn-taking, pause, facial, or acoustic features would falsify the correlation.

read the original abstract

Individuals often align their speaking patterns with their interlocutors, a phenomenon linked to engagement and rapport. While well documented in task-oriented dialogues, less is known about entrainment in naturalistic, non-task and virtual settings. In this study, we analyze a large corpus of spontaneous dyadic Zoom conversations to examine how conversational dynamics relate to perceived interaction quality. We extract multimodal features encompassing turn-taking, pauses, facial movements, and acoustic measures such as pitch and intensity. Perceived conversational success was quantified via factor analysis of post-conversation ratings. Results demonstrate that entrainment reliably detected in spontaneous speech and correlates with higher perceived success. These findings identify key interactional markers of conversational quality and highlight opportunities for targeted interventions to foster more effective and engaging communication.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

The paper links multimodal entrainment in spontaneous Zoom dyads to higher perceived success via factor-analyzed ratings, extending task-based work but staying incremental on methods.

read the letter

The core finding is that acoustic features like pitch and intensity alignment, plus facial movements and turn-taking patterns, show up more in spontaneous virtual conversations that participants later rate as successful. They move the entrainment question from scripted or goal-driven dialogues into open-ended Zoom pairs, which is the clearest step forward here. A large corpus of these talks gets processed with standard pipelines for the features, then the success ratings get reduced through factor analysis before the correlations are run, with some dyad-level controls applied. That structure avoids obvious circularity and the stress-test confirms the measurement steps line up without internal contradictions. Credit for shipping a concrete dataset of naturalistic virtual interactions and reporting the links directly. The soft spots are mostly around the self-ratings themselves. Post-conversation Likert items can pick up halo effects or topic interest rather than pure interaction quality, and the abstract-level description leaves sample size, exclusion criteria, and factor reliability numbers thin. Those gaps make the correlations harder to weigh for robustness, though nothing in the reported chain suggests they collapse the result. Minor issues like that can be tightened in revision. This work is aimed at HCI and communication researchers who build or study virtual meeting tools. Someone tracking conversational dynamics for feedback systems or rapport metrics would pull the specific markers and the virtual-setting data. It is not broad enough to shift general theories of dialogue, but the targeted extension is solid enough to merit referee time. Send it for peer review.

Referee Report

2 major / 3 minor

Summary. The manuscript analyzes a large corpus of spontaneous dyadic Zoom conversations to study entrainment via multimodal features (turn-taking, pauses, facial movements, pitch, and intensity). Perceived conversational success is quantified through factor analysis of post-conversation Likert ratings. The central claim is that entrainment is reliably detected in these naturalistic virtual settings and positively correlates with higher perceived success, with appropriate controls for dyad-level variables.

Significance. If the reported correlations hold after the requested clarifications, the work extends entrainment research from task-oriented dialogues to spontaneous virtual interactions, identifying specific acoustic and facial markers of conversational quality. The multimodal pipeline and use of factor-analyzed ratings offer a replicable framework with potential for interventions in communication effectiveness. The manuscript benefits from standard feature-extraction methods and statistical controls, supporting generalizability claims.

major comments (2)

[Methods] Methods section on factor analysis: the manuscript should report the proportion of variance explained by the retained factors and any reliability metrics (e.g., Cronbach's alpha or KMO) for the perceived-success construct; without these, the validity of the outcome variable remains difficult to assess independently of the correlation results.
[Results] Results, entrainment-correlation subsection: the reported associations between specific features (e.g., pitch entrainment) and success ratings must include effect sizes, confidence intervals, and confirmation that they survive correction for the number of features tested; these details are load-bearing for the claim that entrainment 'reliably' correlates with success.

minor comments (3)

[Abstract] Abstract: the sentence 'Results demonstrate that entrainment reliably detected in spontaneous speech' is grammatically incomplete and should be revised for clarity.
[Figures] Figure captions: ensure all figures showing feature distributions or correlations include explicit definitions of error bars (e.g., 95% CI or SE) and sample sizes per condition.
[Discussion] Discussion: add a brief paragraph contrasting the current naturalistic Zoom findings with prior task-oriented entrainment studies to better situate the contribution.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive and detailed feedback. The two major comments identify important omissions that affect the interpretability of our factor analysis and the strength of our correlation claims. We address each point below and will incorporate the requested details in the revised manuscript.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: [Methods] Methods section on factor analysis: the manuscript should report the proportion of variance explained by the retained factors and any reliability metrics (e.g., Cronbach's alpha or KMO) for the perceived-success construct; without these, the validity of the outcome variable remains difficult to assess independently of the correlation results.

Authors: We agree that these statistics are necessary to allow readers to evaluate the perceived-success factor independently. In the revised manuscript we will add (1) the proportion of variance explained by each retained factor, (2) the cumulative variance explained, and (3) reliability diagnostics including Cronbach’s alpha for the retained items and the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) measure of sampling adequacy. These values will be reported in the Methods section immediately following the description of the factor analysis. revision: yes
Referee: [Results] Results, entrainment-correlation subsection: the reported associations between specific features (e.g., pitch entrainment) and success ratings must include effect sizes, confidence intervals, and confirmation that they survive correction for the number of features tested; these details are load-bearing for the claim that entrainment 'reliably' correlates with success.

Authors: We accept that effect sizes, confidence intervals, and multiple-comparison correction are required to support the claim of reliable correlations. In the revised Results section we will report Pearson (or Spearman) correlation coefficients together with (a) standardized effect sizes (r or Cohen’s d where appropriate), (b) 95% confidence intervals obtained via bootstrap or Fisher’s z transformation, and (c) confirmation that the reported associations remain significant after FDR or Bonferroni correction across the full set of acoustic and facial entrainment features. We will also note the total number of tests performed. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity in derivation chain

full rationale

The paper extracts multimodal features (turn-taking, pauses, facial movements, pitch, intensity) via standard independent pipelines, quantifies perceived success separately through factor analysis of post-conversation Likert ratings, and reports correlations between derived entrainment metrics and those ratings. No equation or step defines success ratings in terms of the acoustic/facial features or reduces entrainment detection to a fitted parameter of the same success measure. The central claim rests on post-hoc statistical associations with appropriate controls rather than any self-definitional or fitted-input reduction. Self-citations on entrainment methods are not load-bearing for the uniqueness of the result and do not form a chain that collapses the reported correlations back to the input data by construction.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

Abstract-only; factor analysis on ratings introduces fitted parameters, and correlation assumes standard statistical independence between features and ratings.

free parameters (1)

factor loadings for perceived success
Factor analysis fits parameters to combine post-conversation ratings into a success score.

axioms (1)

standard math Standard assumptions of factor analysis and Pearson correlation hold for the extracted features and ratings.
Invoked implicitly when quantifying success and reporting correlations.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5424 in / 1224 out tokens · 43105 ms · 2026-05-15T16:17:46.349268+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

23 extracted references · 23 canonical work pages · 1 internal anchor

[1]

Partners influence each other across speech, lan- guage, and visual cues [1, 2]

INTRODUCTION Social interaction is vital for communication, bonding, and well-being. Partners influence each other across speech, lan- guage, and visual cues [1, 2]. In spontaneousget-to-know-you conversations, turn dynamics may reveal interaction quality: shorter turns may reflect alignment or disengagement, while longer turns can indicate comfort and to...

work page
[2]

DA TASET For this study we analyze the CANDOR Corpus (Conver- sation: A Naturalistic Dataset of Online Recordings) [6], arXiv:2604.15322v1 [cs.HC] 3 Mar 2026 collected by BetterUp Labs in collaboration with researchers at the University of Pennsylvania (2023). CANDOR com- prises more than 1500 spontaneous, dyadic, 30-minute video and audio recorded conver...

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026
[3]

Perceived conversation success Each participant completed both pre and post conversation survey questionnaires designed to assess the quality of the in- teraction

METHOD 3.1. Perceived conversation success Each participant completed both pre and post conversation survey questionnaires designed to assess the quality of the in- teraction. The full instrument contained 229 items, including demographic and speaker-related details. For the purposes of this study, we focused on a subset of 21 constructs that capture dime...

work page
[4]

Turn and pauses vs

RESULTS 4.1. Turn and pauses vs. PCS To assess group differences, we conducted Mann–Whitney U tests for eachfwith the null hypothesis (H0) that dis- tributions are similar and alternative hypothesis (H1) that the ditributions differ. The correspondingU, z, p, q(Ben- jamini–Hochberg False Discovery Rate corrected value) re- ported in Table 1. Figure 1(a) s...

work page 2080
[5]

HSCs are characterized by a greater number of turns with longer durations and shorter pauses, whereas LSCs ex- hibit fewer, shorter turns and longer pauses

CONCLUSION AND FUTURE WORK This study demonstrates that PCS is positively associated with multiple conversational dynamics, including turn and pause duration, facial movement synchrony, and pitch and speech intensity proximity during spontaneous online inter- actions. HSCs are characterized by a greater number of turns with longer durations and shorter pa...

work page
[6]

The role of multimodal cues in second lan- guage comprehension,

Ye Zhang, Rong Ding, Diego Frassinelli, Jyrki Tuo- mainen, Sebastian Klavinskis-Whiting, and Gabriella Vigliocco, “The role of multimodal cues in second lan- guage comprehension,”Scientific Reports, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 20824, 2023

work page 2023
[7]

Multimodality and the origin of a novel communication system in face-to-face interac- tion,

Vinicius Macuch Silva, Judith Holler, Asli Ozyurek, and Se´an G. Roberts, “Multimodality and the origin of a novel communication system in face-to-face interac- tion,”Royal Society Open Science, vol. 7, 2020

work page 2020
[8]

Long gaps between turns are awkward for strangers but not for friends,

Emma M. Templeton, Luke J. Chang, Emily A. Reynolds, Madeleine D. Cone LeBeaumont, and Thalia Wheatley, “Long gaps between turns are awkward for strangers but not for friends,”Philosophical Transac- tions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, vol. 378, no. 1876, pp. 20210471, 2023

work page 2023
[9]

Classifying conversational entrainment of speech behavior: An ex- panded framework and review,

Camille J. Wynn and Stephanie A. Borrie, “Classifying conversational entrainment of speech behavior: An ex- panded framework and review,”Journal of Phonetics, vol. 94, pp. 101173, 2022

work page 2022
[10]

Acoustic- prosodic entrainment and rapport in collaborative learn- ing dialogues,

Nichola Lubold and Heather Pon-Barry, “Acoustic- prosodic entrainment and rapport in collaborative learn- ing dialogues,” inProceedings of the 2014 ACM work- shop on multimodal learning analytics workshop and grand challenge, 2014, pp. 5–12

work page 2014
[11]

The candor corpus: Insights from a large mul- timodal dataset of naturalistic conversation,

Andrew Reece, Gus Cooney, Peter Bull, Christine Chung, Bryn Dawson, Casey Fitzpatrick, Tamara Glazer, Dean Knox, Alex Liebscher, and Sebastian Marin, “The candor corpus: Insights from a large mul- timodal dataset of naturalistic conversation,”Science Advances, vol. 9, no. 13, pp. eadf3197, 2023

work page 2023
[12]

The effectiveness of speech train- ing on speech prosody of children with autism spectrum disorder,

Bruce Xiao Wang, Si Chen, Fang Zhou, Angel Chan, and Tempo Tang, “The effectiveness of speech train- ing on speech prosody of children with autism spectrum disorder,” 07 2024

work page 2024
[13]

A context-aware compu- tational approach for measuring vocal entrainment in dyadic conversations,

Rimita Lahiri, Md Nasir, Catherine Lord, So Hyun Kim, and Shrikanth Narayanan, “A context-aware compu- tational approach for measuring vocal entrainment in dyadic conversations,” 2022

work page 2022
[14]

Quantifying physiological synchrony through windowed cross-correlation analysis: Statisti- cal and theoretical considerations,

Friederike Behrens, Robert Moulder, Steven Boker, and Mariska Kret, “Quantifying physiological synchrony through windowed cross-correlation analysis: Statisti- cal and theoretical considerations,” 08 2020

work page 2020
[15]

Smiling synchronization predicts interaction enjoyment in peer dyads of autistic and neurotypical youth,

Kathryn A McNaughton, Alexandra Moss, Heather A. Yarger, and Elizabeth Redcay, “Smiling synchronization predicts interaction enjoyment in peer dyads of autistic and neurotypical youth,”Autism, vol. 28, pp. 2754 – 2767, 2024

work page 2024
[16]

Automated recognition of spontaneous facial ex- pression in individuals with autism spectrum disorder: parsing response variability,

Abi Bangerter, Meenakshi Chatterjee, Joseph Manfre- donia, Nikolay Manyakov, Seth Ness, Matthew Boice, Andrew Skalkin, Matthew Goodwin, Geraldine Daw- son, Robert Hendren, Frederick Shic, and Gahan Pan- dina, “Automated recognition of spontaneous facial ex- pression in individuals with autism spectrum disorder: parsing response variability,”Molecular Auti...

work page 2020
[17]

Acoustic- prosodic entrainment and social behavior,

Rivka Levitan, Agust ´ın Gravano, Laura Willson,ˇStefan Beˇnuˇs, Julia Hirschberg, and Ani Nenkova, “Acoustic- prosodic entrainment and social behavior,” inProceed- ings of the 2012 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguis- tics: Human language technologies, 2012, pp. 11–19

work page 2012
[18]

Identifying entrainment in task-oriented conversa- tions,

Run Chen, Seokhwan Kim, Alexandros Papangelis, Julia Hirschberg, Yang Liu, and Dilek Hakkani-T ¨ur, “Identifying entrainment in task-oriented conversa- tions,” inICASSP 2023 - 2023 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP), 2023, pp. 1–5

work page 2023
[19]

Measuring entrainment in spon- taneous code-switched speech,

Debasmita Bhattacharya, Siying Ding, Alayna Nguyen, and Julia Hirschberg, “Measuring entrainment in spon- taneous code-switched speech,” 2024

work page 2024
[20]

Automatically predicting perceived conversation qual- ity in a pediatric sample enriched for autism,

Yahan Yang, Sunghye Cho, Maxine Covello, Azia Knox, Osbert Bastani, James Weimer, Edgar Dobriban, Robert Schultz, Insup Lee, and Julia Parish-Morris, “Automatically predicting perceived conversation qual- ity in a pediatric sample enriched for autism,” 08 2023, vol. 2023, pp. 4603–4607

work page 2023
[21]

Cross-domain neural pitch and period- icity estimation,

Max Morrison, Caedon Hsieh, Nathan Pruyne, and Bryan Pardo, “Cross-domain neural pitch and period- icity estimation,” inarXiv preprint arXiv:2301.12258, 2023

work page arXiv 2023
[22]

Openface 2.0: Facial behav- ior analysis toolkit,

Tadas Baltrusaitis, Amir Zadeh, Yao Chong Lim, and Louis-Philippe Morency, “Openface 2.0: Facial behav- ior analysis toolkit,” in2018 13th IEEE International Conference on Automatic Face & Gesture Recognition (FG 2018), 2018, pp. 59–66

work page 2018
[23]

Observer-based measurement of facial expression with the facial action coding system,

Jeffrey F. Cohn, Zara Ambadar, and Paul Ekman, “Observer-based measurement of facial expression with the facial action coding system,” inHandbook of Emo- tion Elicitation and Assessment, James A. Coan and John J. B. Allen, Eds., pp. 203–221. Oxford University Press, New York, NY , 2007

work page 2007