Non-representational Gestures: Types, Use, and Functions

A special issue of Languages (ISSN 2226-471X).

Deadline for manuscript submissions: closed (31 May 2025) | Viewed by 934

Special Issue Editors


E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
Psychology Department, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada
Interests: gestures; language learning; development; second language acquisition

E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
Humanities Lab, Lund University, Box 117, SE-221 00 Lund, Sweden
Interests: gesture; language acquistion; discourse production; multimodal interaction

Special Issue Information

Dear Colleagues,

This Special Issue focuses on the relationships between non-representational gestures and speech. Psychologists and other scholars have carried out much research on the role of representational (or iconic) gestures in speaking and communicating. While many mysteries remain about the function(s) of representational gestures, some patterns seem reasonably clear. For example, we know that people often produce representational gestures with spoken language with similar meaning (e.g., Hughes-Berheim et al., 2020), particularly verbs (e.g., Özçalişkan et al., 2014). Representational gestures are particularly likely to be produced when speakers are working out how they want to organize speech (Alibali et al., 2017) and when they are talking about visuospatial referents (Hostetter and Alibali, 2019). There is some research to suggest that representational gestures are particularly likely to be produced when speakers are under a heavy cognitive load (Ping and Goldin-Meadow, 2010). 

The scope of this Special Issue is the identification, use and functions of non-representational gestures. While there is no consensus yet on what types of non-representational gestures might exist, I minimally include emblems/conventional gestures, deictic gestures, beats and other pragmatic gestures (Bavelas, 1994; Kendon, 1997; Lopez-Ozieblo, 2020; McNeill, 2016). Do these “types” of gestures refer to categories that make sense in language use? Is there any reason to think that non-representational gestures are used and/or function differently from representational gestures (Lopez-Ozieblo, 2020).  Some non-representational gestures, such as waving and pointing, are produced by children even before they begin to speak (Hirai and Kanakogi, 2019; Kettner and Carpendale, 2013). These allow children to participate in interpersonal communication before they can use conventional words (Carpendale et al., 2014), as do representational gestures in some cultures (Veena and Bellur, 2015). The production of beats (Vilà‐Giménez and Prieto, 2020) and pragmatic gestures (Colletta et al., 2010) supports the production of complex and coherent stories (Laurent et al., 2020). Given the variety of functions that non-representational gestures can serve (Lopez-Ozieblo, 2020), are there some that are unique? Are these functions associated with particular non-representational gesture types?

We request that, prior to submitting a manuscript, interested authors initially submit a proposed title and an abstract of 400–600 words summarizing their intended contribution. Please send it to Elena Nicoladis (elena.nicoladis@ubc.ca). Abstracts will be reviewed by the Guest Editors for the purposes of ensuring proper fit within the scope of the Special Issue. Full manuscripts will undergo a double-blind peer review.

Tentative Completion Schedule

Abstract Submission Deadline: November 15, 2024

Notification of Abstract Acceptance: December 10, 2024

Full Manuscript Deadline: May 31, 2025

References:

Alibali, M. W., Yeo, A., Hostetter, A. B., & Kita, S. (2017). Representational gestures help speakers package information for speaking. Why gesture, 15-37.

Bavelas, J. B. (1994). Gestures as part of speech: Methodological implications. Research on language and social interaction, 27(3), 201-221.

Carpendale, J. I., Atwood, S., & Kettner, V. (2014). Meaning and mind from the perspective of dualist versus relational worldviews: Implications for the development of pointing gestures. Human Development, 56(6), 381-400.

Colletta, J. M., Pellenq, C., & Guidetti, M. (2010). Age-related changes in co-speech gesture and narrative: Evidence from French children and adults. Speech Communication, 52(6), 565-576.

Hirai, M. & Kanakogi, Y. (2019). Communicative hand‐waving gestures facilitate object learning in preverbal infants. Developmental Science, 22(4), e12787.

Hostetter, A. B. & Alibali, M. W. (2019). Gesture as simulated action: Revisiting the framework. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 26, 721-752.

Hughes-Berheim, S. S., Morett, L. M., & Bulger, R. (2020). Semantic relationships between representational gestures and their lexical affiliates are evaluated similarly for speech and text. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 575991.

Kendon, A. (1997). Gesture. Annual review of anthropology, 26(1), 109-128.

Kettner, V. A, & Carpendale, J. I. (2013). Developing gestures for no and yes: Head shaking and nodding in infancy. Gesture, 13(2), 193-209.

Laurent, A., Smithson, L., & Nicoladis, E. (2020). Gesturers tell a story creatively; non-gesturers tell it like it happened. Language Learning and Development, 16(3), 292-308.

Lopez-Ozieblo, R. (2020). Proposing a revised functional classification of pragmatic gestures. Lingua, 247, 102870.

McNeill, D. (2016). Why we gesture: The surprising role of hand movements in communication. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Özçalişkan, Ş., Gentner, D., & Goldin-Meadow, S. (2014). Do iconic gestures pave the way for children's early verbs?. Applied psycholinguistics, 35(6), 1143-1162.

Ping, R. & Goldin‐Meadow, S. (2010). Gesturing saves cognitive resources when talking about nonpresent objects. Cognitive Science, 34(4), 602-619.

Veena, K. D. & Bellur, R. (2015). Development of communicative gestures in normally developing children between 8 and 18 months: An exploratory study. Journal of Early Childhood Research, 13(2), 150-164.

Vilà‐Giménez, I. & Prieto, P. (2020). Encouraging kids to beat: Children's beat gesture production boosts their narrative performance. Developmental Science, 23(6), e12967.

Prof. Dr. Elena Nicoladis
Dr. Maria Graziano
Guest Editors

Manuscript Submission Information

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. All submissions that pass pre-check are peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as short communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 100 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for announcement on this website.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a double-blind peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Languages is an international peer-reviewed open access monthly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 1400 CHF (Swiss Francs). Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.

Keywords

  • gestures
  • language learning
  • development
  • second language acquisition

Benefits of Publishing in a Special Issue

  • Ease of navigation: Grouping papers by topic helps scholars navigate broad scope journals more efficiently.
  • Greater discoverability: Special Issues support the reach and impact of scientific research. Articles in Special Issues are more discoverable and cited more frequently.
  • Expansion of research network: Special Issues facilitate connections among authors, fostering scientific collaborations.
  • External promotion: Articles in Special Issues are often promoted through the journal's social media, increasing their visibility.
  • Reprint: MDPI Books provides the opportunity to republish successful Special Issues in book format, both online and in print.

Further information on MDPI's Special Issue policies can be found here.

Published Papers (2 papers)

Order results
Result details
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:

Research

18 pages, 1040 KB  
Article
The Role of Self-Adaptors in Lexical Retrieval
by Kazuki Sekine and Hiroshi Hotta
Languages 2025, 10(9), 209; https://doi.org/10.3390/languages10090209 (registering DOI) - 26 Aug 2025
Abstract
This study investigated whether self-adaptor behaviours, defined as non-communicative bodily actions such as touching one’s face or clasping one’s hands, facilitate lexical retrieval. Sixty Japanese-speaking adults were assigned to one of three conditions: a self-adaptor condition (instructed to hold their cheeks), a suppression [...] Read more.
This study investigated whether self-adaptor behaviours, defined as non-communicative bodily actions such as touching one’s face or clasping one’s hands, facilitate lexical retrieval. Sixty Japanese-speaking adults were assigned to one of three conditions: a self-adaptor condition (instructed to hold their cheeks), a suppression condition (hand movements inhibited), and a control condition in which participants were allowed to move their hands freely. Participants completed a lexical retrieval task designed to elicit tip-of-the-tongue (TOT) states, followed by a recall task. Responses were categorised as successful retrieval, retrieval failure, TOT success, or TOT failure. Results showed that the self-adaptor condition achieved significantly more correct responses than the suppression condition, indicating that self-adaptor behaviour supports lexical access during retrieval difficulty. However, self-adaptor behaviour did not enhance the resolution of TOT states or improve recall performance. Video-based analysis further revealed that gestures increased markedly during TOT states, while self-adaptor behaviours were more frequent overall. These findings suggest that self-adaptor behaviour contributes to general lexical retrieval processes but does not directly facilitate the resolution of TOT states. The distinction between the functions of spontaneous bodily movements is therefore essential. This study extends the understanding of how embodied behaviours interact with verbal processes and underscores the cognitive significance of non-communicative bodily actions in speech production. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Non-representational Gestures: Types, Use, and Functions)
Show Figures

Figure 1

26 pages, 1506 KB  
Article
The Role of Non-Representational Hand Gestures in Creative Thinking
by Gyulten Hyusein and Tilbe Göksun
Languages 2025, 10(9), 206; https://doi.org/10.3390/languages10090206 (registering DOI) - 26 Aug 2025
Abstract
Previous studies suggest that representational gestures support divergent thinking and that mental imagery is necessary for gestures to aid convergent thinking. However, less is known about non-representational gesture use (i.e., beat and palm-revealing) during creative thinking. Across two experiments, we examined whether these [...] Read more.
Previous studies suggest that representational gestures support divergent thinking and that mental imagery is necessary for gestures to aid convergent thinking. However, less is known about non-representational gesture use (i.e., beat and palm-revealing) during creative thinking. Across two experiments, we examined whether these gestures supported or hindered creativity and the effects of mental imagery on creative thinking. In Experiment 1, we tested both gesture-spontaneous and gesture-encouraged conditions during divergent thinking. Beat gestures, irrespective of condition, were negatively associated with originality in divergent thinking for individuals with high mental imagery. Encouraged palm-revealing gestures were negatively associated with fluency, flexibility, and elaboration in divergent thinking, regardless of mental imagery. In Experiment 2, we examined spontaneous gestures during both divergent and convergent thinking and assessed mental imagery vividness and skills. Beat gestures were negatively associated with convergent thinking for individuals with low or average imagery vividness. Similarly, palm-revealing gestures were negatively associated with convergent thinking for individuals with low mental imagery skills. Vividness of imagery was the only consistent positive predictor of divergent thinking. Spontaneous gestures were not associated with divergent thinking. These findings show that, unlike representational, non-representational gesture use does not facilitate and might even hurt creativity, depending on individual differences in mental imagery. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Non-representational Gestures: Types, Use, and Functions)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Back to TopTop