Beyond common and privileged: Gradient representations of common ground in real-time language use

Language and Cognitive Processes

Volumn 27, Issue 1, 2012, Pages 62-89

  Brown Schmidt, Sarah ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT URBANA CHAMPAIGN   (United States)

Author keywords

Common ground; Eye tracking; Grounding; Reference

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CLINICAL ARTICLE; DISCOURSE ANALYSIS; EYE TRACKING; HUMAN; LANGUAGE; LINGUISTICS; PRIORITY JOURNAL;

EID: 84855938903     PISSN: 01690965     EISSN: 14640732     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/01690965.2010.543363     Document Type: Article

References (55)

1. Akaike, H. 1974. A new look at the statistical model identification. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, 19: 716-723.
2. Altmann, G. T. M. (in press). Language can mediate eye movement control within 100 milliseconds, regardless of whether there is anything to move the eyes to. Acta Psychologica.
3. Altmann, G. T. M. and Kamide, Y. 2009. Discourse-mediation of the mapping between language and the visual world: Eye movements and mental representation. Cognition, 111: 55-71.
4. Baayen, R. H. 2008. Analyzing linguistic data: A practical introduction to statistics, Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
5. Baayen, R. H., Davidson, D. J. and Bates, D. M. 2008. Mixed-effects models with crossed random effects for subjects and items. Journal of Memory and Language, 59: 390-412.
6. Barr, D. J. 2008. Pragmatic expectations at linguistic evidence: Listeners anticipate but do not integrate common ground. Cognition, 109: 18-40.
7. Bates, D. M. (2007). Linear mixed model implementation in lme4. Manuscript, University of Wisconsin-Madison, January 2007.
8. Brainard, D. H. 1997. The psychophysics toolbox. Spatial Vision, 10: 433-436.
9. Brennan, S. E. and Clark, H. H. 1996. Conceptual pacts and lexical choice in conversation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory & Cognition, 22: 482-493.
10. Brown-Schmidt, S. 2009a. Partner-specific interpretation of maintained referential precedents during interactive dialog. Journal of Memory and Language, 61: 171-190.
11. Brown-Schmidt, S. 2009b. The role of executive function in perspective-taking during on-line language comprehension. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 16: 893-900.
12. Brown-Schmidt, S., Gunlogson, C. and Tanenhaus, M. K. 2008. Addressees distinguish shared from private information when interpreting questions during interactive conversation. Cognition, 107: 1122-1134.
13. Carlson, S. M. and Moses, L. J. 2001. Individual differences in inhibitory control and children's theory of mind. Child Development, 72: 1032-1053.
14. Clark, H. H. 1992. Arenas of language use, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
15. Clark, H. H. 1996. Using language, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
16. Clark, H. H. and Brennan, S. A. 1991. "Grounding in communication". In Perspectives on socially shared cognition, Edited by: Resnick, L. B., Levine, J. M. and Teasley, S. D. 127-149. Washington, DC: APA Books.
17. Clark H. H. & Marshall C. R. 1978. Reference diaries. In D. L. Waltz Theoretical issues in natural language processing, Vol. 2 (pp.57-63). New York: Association for Computing Machinery.
18. Clark, H. H., & Marshall, C. R. (1981). Definite reference and mutual knowledge. In A. K. Joshi, B. L. Webber, & I. A. Sag (Eds.), Elements of discourse understanding (pp. 10-63). Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
19. Clark, H. H. and Schaefer, E. F. 1989. Contributing to discourse. Cognitive Science, 13: 259-294.
20. Clark, H. H. and Wilkes-Gibbs, D. 1986. Referring as a collaborative process. Cognition, 22: 1-39.
21. Epley N., Morewedge, C. K. and Keysar, B. 2004. Perspective taking in children and adults: Equivalent egocentrism but differential correction. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 40: 760-768.
22. Ferguson, H. J., Scheepers, C. and Sanford, A. J. 2010. Expectations in counterfactual and theory of mind reasoning. Language and Cognitive Processes, 25: 297-346.
23. Fussell, S. R. and Krauss, R. M. 1989. Understanding friends and strangers: The effects of audience design on message comprehension. European Journal of Social Psychology, 19: 509-525.
24. Fussell, S. R. and Krauss, R. M. 1991. Accuracy and bias in estimates of others' knowledge. European Journal of Social Psychology, 21: 445-454.
25. Fussell, S. R. and Krauss, R. M. 1992. Coordination of knowledge in communication: Effects of speakers' assumptions about what others know. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62: 378-391.
26. Gunlogson C. 2001. True to form: Rising and falling declaratives as questions in English (unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of California, Santa Cruz, CA.
27. Hallett P. E. 1986. Eye movements. In K. R. Boff, L. Kaufman, & J. P. Thomas (Eds.), Handbook of perception and human performance, Vol. 1. (pp.10.1-10.112). New York: Wiley.
28. Hanna, J. E. and Brennan, S. E. 2007. Speakers' eye gaze disambiguates referring expressions early during face-to-face conversation. Journal of Memory and Language, 57: 596-615.
29. Hanna, J. E., Tanenhaus, M. K. and Trueswell, J. C. 2003. The effects of common ground and perspective on domains of referential interpretation. Journal of Memory and Language, 49: 43-61.
30. Heller, D., Grodner, D. and Tanenhaus, M. K. 2008. The role of perspective in identifying domains of reference. Cognition, 108: 831-836.
31. Horton, W. S. 2007. The influence of partner-specific memory associations on language production: Evidence from picture naming. Language and Cognitive Processes, 22: 1114-1139.
32. Horton, W. S. and Gerrig, R. J. 2005a. Conversational common ground and memory processes in language production. Discourse Processes, 40: 1-35.
33. Horton, W. S. and Gerrig, R. J. 2005b. The impact of memory demands on audience design during language production. Cognition, 96: 127-142.
34. Keysar, B., Barr, D. J., Balin, J. A. and Brauner, J. S. 2000. Taking perspective in conversation: The role of mutual knowledge in comprehension. Psychological Science, 11: 32-38.
35. Keysar, B., Barr, D. J., Balin, J. A. and Paek, T. S. 1998. Definite reference and mutual knowledge: Process models of common ground in comprehension. Journal of Memory and Language, 39: 1-20.
36. Keysar, B., Lin, S. and Barr, D. J. 2003. Limits on theory of mind use in adults. Cognition, 89: 25-41.
37. Krauss, R. M. and Weinheimer, S. 1966. Concurrent feedback, confirmation, and the encoding of referents in verbal communication. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 4: 343-346.
38. Lin, S., Keysar, B. and Epley, N. 2010. Reflexively mindblind: Using theory of mind to interpret behavior requires effortful attention. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 46: 551-556.
39. MacDonald, M. C. and Christiansen, M. H. 2002. Reassessing working memory: Comment on Just and Carpenter (1992) and Waters and Caplan (1996). Psychological Review, 109: 35-54.
40. Metzing, C. and Brennan, S. E. 2003. When conceptual pacts are broken: Partner-specific effects on the comprehension of referring expressions. Journal of Memory and Language, 49: 201-213.
41. Nadig, A. S. and Sedivy, J. C. 2002. Evidence of perspective-taking constraints in children's on-line reference resolution. Psychological Science, 13: 329-336.
42. Nilsen, E. S. and Graham, S. A. 2009. The relations between children's communicative perspective-taking and executive functioning. Cognitive Psychology, 58: 220-249.
43. Novick J. M., Trueswell, J. C. and Thompson-Schill, S. L. 2005. Cognitive control and parsing: Reexamining the role of Broca's area in sentence comprehension. Cognitive, Affective, Behavioral Neuroscience, 5: 263-281.
44. Pelli, D. G. 1997. The videotoolbox software for visual psychophysics: Transforming numbers into movies. Spatial Vision, 10: 437-442.
45. Quene, H. 2008. Multilevel modeling of between-speaker and within-speaker variation in spontaneous speech tempo. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 123: 1104-1113.
46. Richardson, D. C., Dale, R. and Kirkham, N. Z. 2007. The art of conversation is coordination. Psychological Science, 18: 407-413.
47. Roque, A., & Traum, D. (2008, June). Degrees of grounding based on evidence of understanding. In D. Schlangen & B. A. Hockey (Eds.), Proceedings of The 9th SIGdial workshop on discourse and dialogue (SIGdial 2008) (pp. 54-63). Stroudsburg, PA: Association for Computational Linguistics.
48. Roque, A., & Traum, D. (2009, July). Improving a virtual human using a model of degrees of grounding. In C. Boutilier (Ed.), Proceedings of international joint conference on artificial intelligence (IJCAI-09) (pp. 1537-1542). Menlo Park, CA: AAAI Press.
49. Schegloff, E. A. 1982. "Discourse as an interactional achievement: Some uses of "Uh Huh" and other things that come between sentences". In Georgetown University roundtable on language and linguistics 1981; Analyzing discourse: Text and talk, Edited by: Tannen, D. 71-93. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
50. Schober, M. F. and Clark, H. H. 1989. Understanding by addressees and overhearers. Cognitive Psychology, 21: 211-232.
51. Stroop, J. R. 1935. Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 18: 643-662.
52. Tanenhaus, M. K., Spivey-Knowlton, M. J., Eberhard, K. M. and Sedivy, J. C. 1995. Integration of visual and linguistic information in spoken language comprehension. Science, 268: 1632-1634.
53. Wells, J. B., Christiansen, M. H., Race, D. S., Acheson, D. J. and MacDonald, M. C. 2009. Experience and sentence processing: Statistical learning and relative clause comprehension. Cognitive Psychology, 58: 250-271.
54. Wilkes-Gibbs, D. and Clark, H. H. 1992. Coordinating beliefs in conversation. Journal of Memory and Language, 31: 183-194.
55. Wu, S. and Keysar, B. 2007. The effect of culture on perspective taking. Psychological Science, 18: 600-606.