How to Use Comic-Strip Graphics to Represent Signed Conversation

References

• Albert, S., & De Ruiter, J. P. (2018). Repair: The interface between interaction and cognition. Topics in Cognitive Science, 10(2), 279–313. https://doi.org/10.1111/tops.12339
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Allwood, J. (1996). Några perspektiv på talspråksforskning [Some perspectives on spoken language research]. In M. Thelander (Ed.), Samspel & variation: Språkliga studier tillägnade Bengt Nordberg På 60-årsdagen [Interaction & variation: Linguistic studies dedicated to Bengt Nordberg for his 60th anniversary] (23 pp.). Uppsala University, Dept Of Nordic Languages. http://sskkii.gu.se/jens/publications/docs076-100/081.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Baker, C. (1977). Regulators and turn-taking in American sign language discourse. In L. A. Friedman (Ed.), On the other hand: New perspectives on American sign language (pp. 215–236). Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bavelier, D., Dye, M. W. G., & Hauser, P. C. (2006). Do deaf individuals see better? Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 10(11), 512–518. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2006.09.006
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beukeleers, I., Brône, G., & Vermeerbergen, M. (2020). Unaddressed participants’ gaze behavior in Flemish sign language interactions: Planning gaze shifts after recognizing an upcoming (possible) turn completion. Journal of Pragmatics, 162, 62–83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2020.04.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bolden, G. B. (2011). On the organization of repair in multiperson conversation: The case of “other”-selection in other-initiated repair sequences. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 44(3), 237–262. https://doi.org/10.1080/08351813.2011.591835
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bosworth, R. G., & Dobkins, K. R. (2002). The effects of spatial attention on motion processing in deaf signers, hearing signers, and hearing nonsigners. Brain and Cognition, 49(1), 152–169. https://doi.org/10.1006/brcg.2001.1497
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bucholtz, M. (2000). The politics of transcription. Journal of Pragmatics, 32(10), 1439–1465. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(99)00094-6
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coates, J., & Sutton-Spence, R. (2001). Turn‐taking patterns in deaf conversation. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 5(4), 507–529. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9481.00162
   Google Scholar
• Codina, C. J., Buckley, D., Port, M., & Pascalis, O. (2011). Deaf and hearing children: A comparison of peripheral vision development. Developmental Science, 14(4), 725–737. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-7687.2010.01017.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Codina, C. J., Pascalis, O., Baseler, H. A., Levine, A. T., & Buckley, D. (2017). Peripheral visual reaction time is faster in deaf adults and British sign language interpreters than in hearing adults. Frontiers in Psychology, 8(50), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00050
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Crasborn, O., & Sloetjes, H. (2008). Enhanced ELAN functionality for sign language corpora: Proceedings of the 3rd workshop on the representation and processing of sign languages: Construction and exploitation of sign language corpora. LREC 2008, Sixth international conference on language resources and evaluation, Marrakech, Morocco. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/215685477_Enhanced_ELAN_functionality_for_sign_language_coropora
   Google Scholar
• Crasborn, O. A. (2010). What does “Informed consent” mean in the internet age? Publishing sign language corpora as open content. Sign Language Studies, 10(2), 276–290. https://doi.org/10.1353/sls.0.0044
   Google Scholar
• Crasborn, O. A. (2014). Transcription and notation methods. In E. Orfanidou, B. Woll, & G. Morgan (Eds.), Research methods in sign language studies: A practical guide (Vol. 6, pp. 74–89). Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118346013.ch5
   Google Scholar
• Duranti, A. (2006). Transcripts, like shadows on a wall. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 13(4), 301–310. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327884mca1304_3
   Google Scholar
• Dynel, M. (2014). On the part of ratified participants: Ratified listeners in multi-party interactions. Brno Studies in English, 40(1), 27–44. https://doi.org/10.5817/BSE2014-1-2
   Google Scholar
• Egbert, M. M. (1997). Some interactional achievements of other-initiated repair in multiperson conversation. Journal of Pragmatics, 27(5), 611–634. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(96)00039-2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eisner, W. (2001). Comics & sequential art (21th ed.). Poorhouse Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ekberg, S. (2012). Addressing a source of trouble outside of the repair space. Journal of Pragmatics, 44(4), 374–386. https://doi.org/10.1016/2012.01.006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Emmorey, K. (2003). Perspectives on classifier constructions in sign language: Workshop on classifier constructions. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/238293697_Perspectives_on_Classifier_Constructions_in_Signed_Languages
   Google Scholar
• Esmail, J. (2008). The discourse of embodiment in the nineteenth century British and North American sign language debates (Publication Number NR69936) [Ph.D.]. Queen’s University. ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global. Ann Arbor, Canada. https://www.collectionscanada.gc.ca/obj/thesescanada/vol2/002/NR69936.PDF?oclc_number=794618443
   Google Scholar
• Ferrara, L., & Johnston, T. (2014). Elaborating who’s what: A study of constructed action and clause structure in Auslan (Australian sign language). Australian Journal of Linguistics, 34(2), 193–215. https://doi.org/10.1080/07268602.2014.887405
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Foucault, M. (1976). Ceci n’est pas une pipe [This is not a pipe]. October, 1, 6–21. https://doi.org/10.2307/778503
   Google Scholar
• Goffman, E. (1963). Behavior in public places: Notes on the social organization of gathering. The Free Press.
   Google Scholar
• Goodwin, C., & Heritage, J. (1990). Conversation analysis. Annual Review of Anthropology, 19(1), 283–307. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.an.19.100190.001435
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goodwin, M. H., & Goodwin, C. (2012). Car talk: Integrating texts, bodies, and changing landscapes. Semiotica, 2012(191), 257–286. https://doi.org/10.1515/sem-2012-0063
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Greer, T. (2015). Appealing to a broker: Initiating third-person repair in mundane second language interaction. Novitas-ROYAL (Research on Youth and Language), 9(1), 1–14. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1167203.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Groeber, S., & Pochon-Berger, E. (2014). Turns and turn-taking in sign language interaction: A study of turn-final holds. Journal of Pragmatics, 65, 121. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2013.08.012
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gustines, G. G. (2014, January 9). One of Marvel’s avengers turns to sign language. ArtsBeat, New York Times Blog. https://artsbeat.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/07/24/one-of-marvels-avengers-turns-to-sign-language/?_php=true&_type=blogs&_php=true&_type=blogs&_r=1&
   Google Scholar
• Haddington, P., & Rauniomaa, M. (2014). Interaction between road users: Offering space in traffic. Space and Culture, 17(2), 176–190. https://doi.org/10.1177/1206331213508498
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heath, C., & Luff, P. (2012a). Embodied action and organizational activity. In T. S. Jack Sidnell (Ed.), The handbook of conversation analysis (pp. 281–307). John Wiley & Sons. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118325001.ch14
   Google Scholar
• Heath, C., & Luff, P. (2012b). Some ‘technical challenges’ of video analysis: Social actions, objects, material realities and the problems of perspective. Qualitative Research, 12(3), 255–279. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794112436655
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heath, C., Luff, P., & Hindmarsh, J. (2010). Video in qualitative research: Analysing social interaction in everyday life. SAGE.
   Google Scholar
• Hepburn, A., & Bolden, G. B. (2012). The conversation analytic approach to transcription. In J. Sidnell & T. Stivers (Eds.), The handbook of conversation analysis (pp. 57–76). John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118325001.ch4
   Google Scholar
• Heritage, J. (1984). A change-of-state token and aspects of its sequential placement. In J. M. Atkinson & J. Heritage (Eds.), Structures of social action (pp. 299–345). Cambridge University Press. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/244414507_A_Change-of-State_Token_and_Aspects_of_its_Sequential_Placement
   Google Scholar
• Hitzel, E. (2015). Introduction. In Effects of peripheral vision on eye movements: A virtual reality study on gaze allocation in naturalistic tasks (pp. 5–44). Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-08466-0_1
   Google Scholar
• Hjulstad, J. (2017). Embodied participation: In the semiotic ecology of a visually-oriented virtual classroom Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Faculty of Humanities. https://ntnuopen.ntnu.no/ntnu-xmlui/handle/11250/2434026
   Google Scholar
• Hoffmann-Dilloway, E. (2011). Writing the smile: Language ideologies in, and through, sign language scripts. Language and Communication, 31(4), 345–355. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langcom.2011.05.008
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hutchby, I., & Wooffitt, R. (1998). Conversation analysis: Principles, practices and applications. Polity Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404500233046
   Google Scholar
• Ince, I. F., & Kim, J. W. (2011). A 2D eye gaze estimation system with low-resolution webcam images. EURASIP Journal on Advances in Signal Processing, 2011(1), 40. https://doi.org/10.1186/1687-6180-2011-40
   Google Scholar
• Ivarsson, J. (2010). Developing the construction sight: Architectural education and technological change. Visual Communication (London, England), 9(2), 171–191. https://doi.org/10.1177/1470357210369883
   Google Scholar
• Jefferson, G. (2004). Glossary of transcript symbols with an introduction. In G. H. Lerner (Ed.), Conversation analysis: Studies from the first generation (pp. 13–31). John Benjamins. http://liso-archives.liso.ucsb.edu/Jefferson/Transcript.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Johnson, K. L. (1991). Miscommunication in interpreted classroom interaction. Sign Language Studies, 1070(1), 1–34. https://doi.org/10.1353/sls.1991.0005
   Google Scholar
• Kaneko, M., & Mesch, J. (2013). Eye gaze in creative sign language. Sign Language Studies, 13(3), 372–400. https://doi.org/10.1353/sls.2013.0008
   Google Scholar
• Kauling, E. J. (2012). Look who’s talking. Turn taking in sign language interpreted interaction. University of Amsterdam. https://www.academia.edu/12780230/Look_whos_talking_Turntaking_in_sign_language_interpreted_interaction
   Google Scholar
• Kendon, A. (1967). Some functions of gaze-direction in social interaction. Acta Psychologica, 26(C), 22–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/0001-6918(67)90005-4
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Kensy, C., Natasha, A., & Susan, G.-M. (2018). The palm-up puzzle: Meanings and origins of a widespread form in gesture and sign. Frontiers in Communication, 3,1–23. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcomm.2018.00023
   Google Scholar
• Kitzinger, C. (2012). Repair. In J. Sidnell & T. Stivers (Eds.), The handbook of conversation analysis (pp. 229–256). Wiley-Blackwell. https://ebookcentral-proquest-com.ezproxy.oslomet.no
   Google Scholar
• Kleinke, C. L. (1986). Gaze and eye contact: A research review. Psychological Bulletin, 100(1), 78–100. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.100.1.78
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Koivisto, A. (2015). Displaying now-understanding: The Finnish change-of-state token aa. Discourse Processes, 52(2), 111–148. https://doi.org/10.1080/0163853X.2014.914357
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kuttner, P. J., Weaver-Hightower, M. B., & Sousanis, N. (2020). Comics-based research: The affordances of comics for research across disciplines. Qualitative Research, 21(2), 195–214. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794120918845
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Laurier, E. (2013). Before, in and after: Cars making their way through roundabouts. In P. Haddington, L. Mondada, & M. Nevile (Eds.), Interaction and mobility (Vol. 20, pp. 210–242). De Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110291278.210
   Google Scholar
• Laurier, E. (2014). The graphic transcript: Poaching comic book grammar for inscribing the visual, spatial and temporal aspects of action. Geography Compass, 8(4), 235–248. https://doi.org/10.1111/gec3.12123
   Google Scholar
• Laurier, E. (2019). The panel show: Further experiments with graphic transcripts and vignettes. Social Interaction. Video-Based Studies of Human Sociality, 2(1). https://doi.org/10.7146/si.v2i1.113968
   Google Scholar
• Lerner, G. H. (2003). Selecting next speaker: The context-sensitive operation of a context-free organization. Language in Society, 32(2), 177–201. https://doi.org/10.1017/S004740450332202X
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lewandowska-Tomaszczyk, B. (2017). Partial perception and approximate understanding. Research in Language, 15(2), 129–152. https://doi.org/10.1515/rela-2017-0009
   Google Scholar
• Linell, P. (1982). The written language bias in linguistics. Linköping University Electronic Press. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203342763
   Google Scholar
• Linell, P. (2005). The written language bias in linguistics: Its nature, origins and transformations (2nd ed.). Routledge. https://ebookcentral-proquest-com.ezproxy.oslomet.no/lib/hioa/detail.action?docID=199577&pq-origsite=primo
   Google Scholar
• Manrique, E. (2016). Other-initiated repair in Argentine sign language. Open Linguistics, 2(1), 35. https://doi.org/10.1515/opli-2016-0001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Manrique, E. (2017). Achieving mutual understanding in Argentine sign language (LSA). Radboud University Nijmegen. https://pure.mpg.de/rest/items/item_2468462_11/component/file_2468466/content
   Google Scholar
• Manrique, E., & Enfield, N. J. (2015). Suspending the next turn as a form of repair initiation: Evidence from Argentine sign language. Frontiers in Psychology, 6,1–21. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01326
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marstrand, A. K., & Svennevig, J. (2018). A preference for non-invasive touch in caregiving contexts. Social Interaction. Video-Based Studies of Human Sociality, 1(2). https://doi.org/10.7146/si.v1i2.110019
   Google Scholar
• McCloud, S., Lappan, B., & Martin, M. (1994). Understanding comics. HarperPerennial.
   Google Scholar
• McIlvenny, P. (2014). Vélomobile formations-in-action: Biking and talking together. Space and Culture, 17(2), 137–156. https://doi.org/10.1177/1206331213508494
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McKee, R. L. (2011). So, well, whatever: Discourse functions of palm-up in New Zealand sign language. Sign Language & Linguistics, 14(2), 213–247. https://doi.org/10.1075/sll.14.2.01mck
   Google Scholar
• Mondada, L. (2011). Understanding as an embodied, situated and sequential achievement in interaction. Journal of Pragmatics, 43(2), 542–552. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2010.08.019
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mondada, L. (2018). Multiple temporalities of language and body in interaction: Challenges for transcribing multimodality. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 51(1), 85–106. https://doi.org/10.1080/08351813.2018.1413878
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mondada, L. (2019). Transcribing silent actions: Multimodal approach of sequence organization. Social Interaction. Video-Based Studies of Human Sociality, 2(1). https://doi.org/10.7146/si.v2i1.113150
   Google Scholar
• Napier, J. (2007). Cooperation in interpreter-mediated monologic talk. Discourse & Communication, 1(4), 407–432. https://doi.org/10.1177/1750481307082206
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nikander, P. (2008). Working with transcripts and translated data. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 5(3), 225–231. https://doi.org/10.1080/14780880802314346
   Google Scholar
• Ochs, E. (1979). Transcription as theory. In E. Ochs & B. B. Schieffelin (Eds.), Developmental pragmatics (pp. 43–72). Academic Press. http://www.sscnet.ucla.edu/anthro/faculty/ochs/articles/ochs1979.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Petitta, G., Di Renzo, A., Chiari, I., & Rossini, P. (2013). Sign language representation: New approaches to the study of Italian sign language (LIS). In G. Petitta, A. Di Renzo, I. Chiari, P. Rossini, L. Meurant, A. Sinte, M. Van Herreweghe, & M. Vermeerbergen (Eds.), Sign language research, uses and practices (1st ed., pp. 137–158). De Gruyter. http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctvbkk4dr.9
   Google Scholar
• Pizzuto, E. A., Chiari, I., & Rossini, P. (2011). Representing signed languages: Theoretical, methodological and practical issues. In Fabrizio Serra (Ed.) Rivista di psicolinguistica applicata: XI, 3 (pp. 205–241). Pisa. http://digital.casalini.it/2496458
   Google Scholar
• Psathas, G., & Anderson, T. (1990). The ’practices’ of transcription in conversation analysis. Semiotica, 78(1–2), 75–100. https://doi.org/10.1515/semi.1990.78.1–2.75
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rosenthal, A. (2009). Lost in transcription: The problematics of commensurability in academic representations of American sign language. Text & Talk, 29(5), 595. https://doi.org/10.1515/TEXT.2009.031
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sacks, H., Jefferson, G., & Schegloff, E. A. (1995). Lectures on conversation (One paperback vol ed.). Blackwell. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781444328301
   Google Scholar
• Sacks, H., Schegloff, E. A., & Jefferson, G. (1974). A simplest systematics for the organization of turn taking for conversation. Language, 50(4), 696–735. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-623550-0.50008-2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sallandre, M.-A., & Garcia, B. (2013). Epistemological issues in the semiological model for the annotation of sign languages. In L. Meurant, A. Sinte, M. Van Herreweghe, M. Vermeerbergen, & A. Sinte (Eds.), Sign language research, uses and practices: Crossing views on theoretical and applied sign language linguistics (pp. 159–178). De Gruyter. http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/hioa/detail.action?docID=893554
   Google Scholar
• Sallandre, M.-A., & Garcia, B. (2020). Contribution of the semiological approach to deixis-anaphora in sign language: The key role of eye-gaze. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 583763. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.583763
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sanford, A. J., & Moxey, L. M. (1995). Aspects of coherence in written language: A psychological perspective. In M. A. Gernsbacher & T. Givón (Eds.), Coherence in spontaneous text (Vol. 31, pp. 161–187). J. Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Schegloff, E. A. (1992). Repair after next turn: The last structurally provided defense of intersubjectivity in conversation. American Journal of Sociology, 97(5), 1295–1345. https://doi.org/10.1086/229903
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schegloff, E. A. (1997). Practices and actions: Boundary cases of other-initiated repair. Discourse Processes, 23(3), 499–546. https://doi.org/10.1080/01638539709545001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schegloff, E. A., Jefferson, G., & Sacks, H. (1977). The preference for self-correction in the organization of repair in conversation. Language, 53(2), 361–382. https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.1977.0041
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Selting, M., Auer, P., Barden, B., Bergmann, J., Couper-Kuhlen, E., Günthner, S., Meier, C., Quasthoff, U., Schlobinski, P., & Uhmann, S. (2011). A transcription system for conversation analysis. Linguistische Berichte, 12, 1–51. http://www.gespraechsforschung-online.de/fileadmin/dateien/heft2011/px-gat2-englisch.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Sheyahshe, M. A. (2013). Native Americans in comic books: A critical study. McFarland, Incorporated, Publishers. https://books.google.no/books?id=Nf5tAAAAQBAJ
   Google Scholar
• Skedsmo, K. (2020a). Multiple other-initiations of repair in Norwegian sign language. Open Linguistics, 6(1), 532–566. https://doi.org/10.1515/opli-2020-0030
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Skedsmo, K. (2020b). Other-initiations of repair in Norwegian sign language. Social Interaction. Video-Based Studies of Human Sociality, 3(2). https://doi.org/10.7146/si.v3i2.117723
   Google Scholar
• Stone, C., & West, D. (2012). Translation, representation and the Deaf ‘voice’. Qualitative Research, 12(6), 645–665. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794111433087
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Supalla, S. J., Cripps, J. H., & Byrne, A. P. J. (2017). Why American sign language gloss must matter. American Annals of the Deaf, 161(5), 540–551. https://doi.org/10.1353/aad.2017.0004
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Swisher, M., Christie, K., & Miller, S. (1989). The reception of signs in peripheral vision. Sign Language Studies, 1063(1), 99–125. https://doi.org/10.1353/sls.1989.0011
   Google Scholar
• Takkinen, R. (2005). Some observations on the use of HamNoSys (Hamburg notation system for sign languages) in the context of the phonetic transcription of childrens signing. Sign Language & Linguistics, 8(1–2), 99–118. https://doi.org/10.1075/sll.8.1.05tak
   Google Scholar
• Ten Have, P. (2007). Doing conversation analysis (2nd ed.). SAGE Publications, Ltd. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781849208895
   Google Scholar
• Thompson, R., Kluender, R., & Emmorey, K. (2006). Eye gaze in American sign language: Linguistic functions for verbs and pronouns [Ph.D]. University of California. ProQuest Dissertations Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Todorović, D. (2006). Geometrical basis of perception of gaze direction. Vision Research, 46(21), 3549–3562. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.visres.2006.04.011
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Valli, C., Lucas, C., Mulrooney, K. J., & Villanueva, M. (2011). Linguistics of American sign language: An introduction (5th ed.). Gallaudet University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Van Herreweghe, M. (2002). Turn-taking mechanisms and active participation in meetings with Deaf and hearing participants in Flanders. In C. Lucas (Ed.), Turn-taking, fingerspelling and contact in signed languages (Vol. 8, pp. 73–103). Gallaudet University Press. http://hdl.handle.net/1854/LU-687117
   Google Scholar
• Wallner, L. (2017a). Framing education: Doing comics literacy in the classroom Linköping University. DiVA. Linköping University Electronic Press. http://liu.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:1150907/FULLTEXT03.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Wallner, L. (2017b). Speak of the bubble - constructing comic book bubbles as literary devices in a primary school classroom. Journal of Graphic Novels & Comics, 8(2), 173–192. https://doi.org/10.1080/21504857.2016.1270221
   Google Scholar
• Wallner, L. (2018). Gutter talk: Co-constructing narratives using comics in the classroom. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 63(6), 819–838. https://doi.org/10.1080/00313831.2018.1452290
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilkes-Gibb, D. (1995). Coherence in collaboration. In M. A. Gernsbacher & T. Givón (Eds.), Coherence in spontaneous text (Vol. 31, pp. 239–268). J. Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.31.09wil
   Google Scholar
• Willemsen, A., Gosen, M., Koole, T., & De Glopper, K. (2020). Gesture, gaze and laughter. Social Interaction. Video-Based Studies of Human Sociality, 2(2). https://doi.org/10.7146/si.v2i2.118045
   Google Scholar
• Wilson, H. R., Wilkinson, F., Lin, L.-M., & Castillo, M. (2000). Perception of head orientation. Vision Research, 40(5), 459–472. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0042-6989(99)00195-9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar