Developing a Guideline for the Labovian-Structural Analysis of Oral Narratives in Japanese

Narrative analysis is a cornerstone of qualitative research. One leading approach is the Labovian model, but its application is labor-intensive, requiring a holistic, recursive interpretive process that moves back and forth between individual parts of the transcript and the transcript as a whole. Existing Labovian datasets are available only in English, which differs markedly from Japanese in terms of grammar and discourse conventions. To address this gap, we introduce the first systematic guidelines for Labovian narrative analysis of Japanese narrative data. Our guidelines retain all six Labovian categories and extend the framework by providing explicit rules for clause segmentation tailored to Japanese constructions. In addition, our guidelines cover a broader range of clause types and narrative types. Using these guidelines, annotators achieved high agreement in clause segmentation (Fleiss' kappa = 0.80) and moderate agreement in two structural classification tasks (Krippendorff's alpha = 0.41 and 0.45, respectively), one of which is slightly higher than that found in prior work despite the use of finer-grained distinctions. This paper describes the Labovian model, the proposed guidelines, the annotation process, and their utility. It concludes by discussing the challenges encountered during the annotation process and the prospects for developing a larger dataset for structural narrative analysis in Japanese qualitative research.

Do Large Vision-Language Models Distinguish between the Actual and Apparent Features of Illusions?

Humans are susceptible to optical illusions, which serve as valuable tools for investigating sensory and cognitive processes. Inspired by human vision studies, research has begun exploring whether machines, such as large vision language models (LVLMs), exhibit similar susceptibilities to visual illusions. However, studies often have used non-abstract images and have not distinguished actual and apparent features, leading to ambiguous assessments of machine cognition. To address these limitations, we introduce a visual question answering (VQA) dataset, categorized into genuine and fake illusions, along with corresponding control images. Genuine illusions present discrepancies between actual and apparent features, whereas fake illusions have the same actual and apparent features even though they look illusory due to the similar geometric configuration. We evaluate the performance of LVLMs for genuine and fake illusion VQA tasks and investigate whether the models discern actual and apparent features. Our findings indicate that although LVLMs may appear to recognize illusions by correctly answering questions about both feature types, they predict the same answers for both Genuine Illusion and Fake Illusion VQA questions. This suggests that their responses might be based on prior knowledge of illusions rather than genuine visual understanding. The dataset is available at https://github.com/ynklab/FILM