Papers › Conversational Feedback in Scripted versus Spontaneous Dialogues: A Comparative Analysis

Conversational Feedback in Scripted versus Spontaneous Dialogues: A Comparative Analysis

27 Sep 2023arXiv:2309.15656archive 2025-07-28

Ildikó Pilán, Laurent Prévot, Hendrik Buschmeier, Pierre Lison

Scripted dialogues such as movie and TV subtitles constitute a widespread source of training data for conversational NLP models. However, there are notable linguistic differences between these dialogues and spontaneous interactions, especially regarding the occurrence of communicative feedback such as backchannels, acknowledgments, or clarification requests. This paper presents a quantitative analysis of such feedback phenomena in both subtitles and spontaneous conversations. Based on conversational data spanning eight languages and multiple genres, we extract lexical statistics, classifications from a dialogue act tagger, expert annotations and labels derived from a fine-tuned Large Language Model (LLM). Our main empirical findings are that (1) communicative feedback is markedly less frequent in subtitles than in spontaneous dialogues and (2) subtitles contain a higher proportion of negative feedback. We also show that dialogues generated by standard LLMs lie much closer to scripted dialogues than spontaneous interactions in terms of communicative feedback.

PaperPDFCode

In Syntology Open this paper in Syntology's Atlas, the map of the papers in Syntology's graph and their citations.

Code

norskregnesentral/conv_feedback officialmentioned in paper report

Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.

Code Syntology ran Syntology

Not run by Syntology. Nothing on this page verifies that the listed code works.

Tasks

Language ModelingLanguage ModellingLarge Language Model

Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28

No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.

Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections