Literature DB >> 18980408

Speaker-external versus speaker-internal forces on utterance form: do cognitive demands override threats to referential success?

Liane Wardlow Lane1, Victor S Ferreira.   

Abstract

To what extent do speaker-external communicative pressures versus speaker-internal cognitive pressures affect utterance form? Four experiments measured speakers' references to privately known (i.e., privileged) objects when naming mutually known (i.e., common ground) objects. Although speaker-external communicative pressures demanded that speakers avoid references to privileged objects, 2 experiments showed that speakers often ignored this demand when it coexisted with a speaker-internal pressure to attend to those privileged objects. The authors hypothesize that this was due to increased salience of privileged objects (a speaker-internal pressure). Experiment 3 showed that directly boosting the salience of privileged objects increased the likelihood that speakers will inappropriately refer to those objects. Experiment 4 showed that the salience-sensitive mechanism in Experiments 1 and 2 is likely related to the mechanism causing such references in Experiment 3. Thus, the language production system is especially sensitive to cognitive pressures even when communicative harm results.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18980408      PMCID: PMC2654616          DOI: 10.1037/a0013353

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn        ISSN: 0278-7393            Impact factor:   3.051


  10 in total

1.  Addressees' needs influence speakers' early syntactic choices.

Authors:  Calion B Lockridge; Susan E Brennan
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2002-09

2.  Evidence of perspective-taking constraints in children's on-line reference resolution.

Authors:  Aparna S Nadig; Julie C Sedivy
Journal:  Psychol Sci       Date:  2002-07

3.  The impact of memory demands on audience design during language production.

Authors:  William S Horton; Richard J Gerrig
Journal:  Cognition       Date:  2004-12-13

4.  Don't talk about pink elephants! Speaker's control over leaking private information during language production.

Authors:  Liane Wardlow Lane; Michelle Groisman; Victor S Ferreira
Journal:  Psychol Sci       Date:  2006-04

5.  Using confidence intervals in within-subject designs.

Authors:  G R Loftus; M E Masson
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  1994-12

6.  When do speakers take into account common ground?

Authors:  W S Horton; B Keysar
Journal:  Cognition       Date:  1996-04

7.  Common ground and everyday language use: comments on Horton and Keysar (1996)

Authors:  J W Polichak; R J Gerrig
Journal:  Cognition       Date:  1998-05

8.  Speaking with common ground: from principles to processes in pragmatics: a reply to Polichak and Gerrig.

Authors:  B Keysar; W S Horton
Journal:  Cognition       Date:  1998-05

9.  Conceptual pacts and lexical choice in conversation.

Authors:  S E Brennan; H H Clark
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  1996-11       Impact factor: 3.051

10.  Talking to children, foreigners, and retarded adults.

Authors:  B M DePaulo; L M Coleman
Journal:  J Pers Soc Psychol       Date:  1986-11
  10 in total
  11 in total

1.  Influence of perspective and goals on reference production in conversation.

Authors:  Si On Yoon; Sungryong Koh; Sarah Brown-Schmidt
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2012-08

2.  A new experimental paradigm to study children's processing of their parent's unscripted language input.

Authors:  Sudha Arunachalam
Journal:  J Mem Lang       Date:  2016-06-01       Impact factor: 3.059

3.  Memory and Common Ground Processes in Language Use.

Authors:  Sarah Brown-Schmidt; Melissa C Duff
Journal:  Top Cogn Sci       Date:  2016-10-31

4.  Scalar reference, contrast and discourse: Separating effects of linguistic discourse from availability of the referent.

Authors:  Lynsey Wolter; Kristen Skovbroten Gorman; Michael K Tanenhaus
Journal:  J Mem Lang       Date:  2011-10-01       Impact factor: 3.059

5.  The cognitive mechanisms underlying perspective taking between conversational partners: evidence from speakers with Alzheimer׳s disease.

Authors:  Liane Wardlow; Iva Ivanova; Tamar H Gollan
Journal:  Neuropsychologia       Date:  2014-01-24       Impact factor: 3.139

6.  Tracking Colisteners' Knowledge States During Language Comprehension.

Authors:  Olessia Jouravlev; Rachael Schwartz; Dima Ayyash; Zachary Mineroff; Edward Gibson; Evelina Fedorenko
Journal:  Psychol Sci       Date:  2018-11-16

7.  Individual differences in speakers' perspective taking: the roles of executive control and working memory.

Authors:  Liane Wardlow
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2013-08

8.  Visual salience modulates structure choice in relative clause production.

Authors:  Jessica L Montag; Maryellen C MacDonald
Journal:  Lang Speech       Date:  2014-06       Impact factor: 1.500

9.  Referential Choices in a Collaborative Storytelling Task: Discourse Stages and Referential Complexity Matter.

Authors:  Marion Fossard; Amélie M Achim; Lucie Rousier-Vercruyssen; Sylvia Gonzalez; Alexandre Bureau; Maud Champagne-Lavau
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2018-02-20

10.  Do You Know What I Know? The Impact of Participant Role in Children's Referential Communication.

Authors:  Holly P Branigan; Jenny Bell; Janet F McLean
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2016-02-23
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.