Brown-Schmidt Sarah
Beckman Institute and Department of Psychology University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
J Mem Lang. 2009 Aug 1;61(2):171-190. doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2009.04.003.
In dialog settings, conversational partners converge on similar names for referents. These lexically entrained terms (Garrod & Anderson, 1987) are part of the common ground between the particular individuals who established the entrained term (Brennan & Clark, 1996), and are thought to be encoded in memory with a partner-specific cue. Thus far, analyses of the time-course of interpretation suggest that partner-specific information may not constrain the initial interpretation of referring expressions (Kronmüller & Barr, 2007; Barr & Keysar, 2002). However, these studies used non-interactive paradigms, which may limit the use of partner-specific representations. This article presents the results of three eye-tracking experiments. Experiment 1a used an interactive conversation methodology in which the experimenter and participant jointly established entrained terms for various images. On critical trials, the same experimenter, or a new experimenter described a critical image using an entrained term, or a new term. The results demonstrated an early, on-line partner-specific effect for interpretation of entrained terms, as well as preliminary evidence for an early, partner-specific effect for new terms. Experiment 1b used a non-interactive paradigm in which participants completed the same task by listening to image descriptions recorded during Experiment 1a; the results showed that partner-specific effects were eliminated. Experiment 2 replicated the partner-specific findings of Experiment 1a with an interactive paradigm and scenes that contained previously unmentioned images. The results suggest that partner-specific interpretation is most likely to occur in interactive dialog settings; the number of critical trials and stimulus characteristics may also play a role. The results are consistent with a large body of work demonstrating that the language processing system uses a rich source of contextual and pragmatic representations to guide on-line processing decisions.
在对话情境中,对话伙伴会就所指对象达成相似的名称。这些词汇上相互影响的术语(加罗德和安德森,1987)是确立该术语的特定个体之间共同基础的一部分(布伦南和克拉克,1996),并且被认为在记忆中与特定伙伴的线索一起被编码。到目前为止,对解释时间进程的分析表明,特定伙伴的信息可能不会限制指代表达式的初始解释(克伦米勒和巴尔,2007;巴尔和凯萨尔,2002)。然而,这些研究使用的是非交互式范式,这可能会限制特定伙伴表征的使用。本文呈现了三个眼动追踪实验的结果。实验1a使用了一种交互式对话方法,实验者和参与者共同为各种图像确立相互影响的术语。在关键试验中,同一位实验者或新的实验者使用一个相互影响的术语或新术语来描述关键图像。结果表明,在对相互影响的术语进行解释时存在早期的、在线的特定伙伴效应,同时也有初步证据表明对新术语也存在早期的、特定伙伴效应。实验1b使用了一种非交互式范式,参与者通过听实验1a期间录制的图像描述来完成相同的任务;结果表明特定伙伴效应被消除了。实验2用交互式范式和包含先前未提及图像的场景重复了实验1a的特定伙伴研究结果。结果表明,特定伙伴的解释最有可能出现在交互式对话情境中;关键试验的数量和刺激特征也可能起作用。这些结果与大量研究工作一致,这些研究表明语言处理系统使用丰富的语境和语用表征来源来指导在线处理决策。