The egocentric basis of language use: Insights from a processing approach

Current Directions in Psychological Science

Volumn 7, Issue 2, 1998, Pages 46-49

  Keysar, Boaz ^a   Barr, Dale J ^a   Horton, William S ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0032042831     PISSN: 09637214     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/1467-8721.ep13175613     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. Clark, H.H. (1992). Arenas of language use. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
2. Clark, H.H., & Marshall, C.R. (1981). Definite reference and mutual knowledge. In A.H. Joshe, B. Webber, & I.A. Sag (Eds.), Elements of discourse understanding (pp. 10-63). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
3. Dell, G.S., & Brown, P.M. (1991). Mechanisms for listener-adaptation in language production: Limiting the role of the "model of the listener." In D. Napoli & J. Kegl (Eds.), Bridges between psychology and linguistics (pp. 105-129). New York: Academic Press.
4. Fussell, S.R., & Krauss, R.M. (1989). The effects of intended audience on message production and comprehension: Reference in a common ground framework. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 25, 203-219.
5. Glucksberg, S., Krauss, R.M., & Weisberg, R. (1966). Referential communication in nursery school children: Method and some preliminary findings. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 3, 333-342.
6. Horton, W.S., & Keysar, B. (1996). When do speakers take into account common ground? Cognition, 59, 91-117.
7. Isaacs, E.A., & Clark, H.H. (1987). References in conversation between experts and novices. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 116, 26-37.
8. Keysar, B. (1993). Common sense and adult theory of communication. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 16, 54.
9. Keysar, B. (1994). The illusory transparency of intention: Linguistic perspective taking in text. Cognitive Psychology, 26, 165-208.
10. Keysar, B. (1997). Unconfounding common ground. Discourse Processes, 24, 253-270.
11. Keysar, B. (1998). Language users as problem solvers: Just what ambiguity problem do they solve? In S.R. Fussell & R.J. Kreuz (Eds.), Social and cognitive psychological approaches to interpersonal communication (pp. 175-200). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
12. Keysar, B., Barr, D.J., Balin, J.A., & Brauner, J.S. (1996, November). Common ground: An error correction mechanism in comprehension. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Psychonomic Society, Chicago.
13. Keysar, B., Barr, D.J., Balin, J.A., & Paek, T.S. (1998). Definite reference and mutual knowledge: Processing models of common ground in comprehension. Journal of Memory and Language, 39, 1-20.
14. Krauss, R.M. (1987). The role of the listener: Addressee influences on message formulation. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 6, 81-98.
15. Levelt, W.J.M. (1989). Speaking: From intention to articulation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
16. Olson, D.R., & Torrance, N. (1987). Language, literacy, and mental states. Discourse Processes, 10, 157-168.
17. Ross, L. (1990). Recognizing the role of construal processes. In I. Rock (Ed.), The legacy of Solomon Asch: Essays in cognition and social psychology (pp. 77-96). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
18. Simon, H.A. (1982). Models of bounded rationality. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
19. Sperber, D., & Wilson, D. (1982). Mutual knowledge and relevance in theories of comprehension. In N. Smith (Eds.), Mutual knowledge (pp. 61-87). London: Academic Press.
20. Tanenhaus, M.K., Spivey-Knowlton, M.J., Eberhard, K., & Sedivy, J.C. (1995). Integration of visual and linguistic information in spoken language comprehension. Science, 268, 1632-1634.
21. Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974). Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Science, 185, 1124-1131.