Literature DB >> 30047022

The influence of conceptual (mis)match on collaborative referring in dialogue.

Dominique Knutsen1,2, Ludovic Le Bigot3.   

Abstract

When two dialogue partners need to refer to something, they jointly negotiate which referring expression should be used. If needed, the chosen referring expression is then reused throughout the interaction, which potentially has a direct, positive impact on subsequent communication. The purpose of this study was to determine if the way in which the partners view, or conceptualise, the referent under discussion, affects referring expression negotiation and subsequent communication. A matching task was preceded by an individual task during which participants were required to describe their conceptualisations of abstract tangram pictures. The results revealed that participants found it more difficult to converge on single referring expression during the matching task when they initially held different conceptualisations of the pictures. This had a negative impact on the remainder of the task. These findings are discussed in light of the shared versus mutual knowledge distinction, highlighting how the former directly contributes to the formation of the latter.

Entities:  

Year:  2018        PMID: 30047022     DOI: 10.1007/s00426-018-1060-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Psychol Res        ISSN: 0340-0727


  14 in total

Review 1.  Toward a mechanistic psychology of dialogue.

Authors:  Martin J Pickering; Simon Garrod
Journal:  Behav Brain Sci       Date:  2004-04       Impact factor: 12.579

2.  An approximate distribution of estimates of variance components.

Authors:  F E SATTERTHWAITE
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  1946-12       Impact factor: 2.571

Review 3.  An integrated theory of language production and comprehension.

Authors:  Martin J Pickering; Simon Garrod
Journal:  Behav Brain Sci       Date:  2013-06-24       Impact factor: 12.579

4.  Random effects structure for confirmatory hypothesis testing: Keep it maximal.

Authors:  Dale J Barr; Roger Levy; Christoph Scheepers; Harry J Tily
Journal:  J Mem Lang       Date:  2013-04       Impact factor: 3.059

5.  Adjusting conceptual pacts in three-party conversation.

Authors:  Si On Yoon; Sarah Brown-Schmidt
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  2014-04-07       Impact factor: 3.051

6.  Revisiting the Memory-Based Processing Approach to Common Ground.

Authors:  William S Horton; Richard J Gerrig
Journal:  Top Cogn Sci       Date:  2016-08-17

7.  References in conversation between young and old normal adults.

Authors:  M Hupet; Y Chantraine; F Nef
Journal:  Psychol Aging       Date:  1993-09

8.  Concurrent feedback, confirmation, and the encoding of referents in verbal communication.

Authors:  R M Krauss; S Weinheimer
Journal:  J Pers Soc Psychol       Date:  1966-09

9.  Hedges enhance memory but inhibit retelling.

Authors:  Kris Liu; Jean E Fox Tree
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2012-10

10.  What's learned together stays together: speakers' choice of referring expression reflects shared experience.

Authors:  Kristen S Gorman; Whitney Gegg-Harrison; Chelsea R Marsh; Michael K Tanenhaus
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  2012-07-30       Impact factor: 3.051

View more
  1 in total

1.  A modified procedure for naming 332 pictures and collecting norms: Using tangram pictures in psycholinguistic studies.

Authors:  Alicia Fasquel; Angèle Brunellière; Dominique Knutsen
Journal:  Behav Res Methods       Date:  2022-07-25
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.