Real-time investigation of referential domains in unscripted conversation: a targeted language game approach.
Open accessAbstract
Two experiments examined the restriction of referential domains during unscripted conversation by analyzing the modification and online interpretation of referring expressions. Experiment 1 demonstrated that from the earliest moments of processing, addressees interpreted referring expressions with respect to referential domains constrained by the conversation. Analysis of eye movements during the conversation showed elimination of standard competition effects seen with scripted language. Results from Experiment 2 pinpointed two pragmatic factors responsible for restriction of the referential domains used by speakers to design referential expressions and demonstrated that the same factors predict whether addressees consider local competitors to be potential referents during online interpretation of the same expressions. These experiments demonstrate, for the first time, that online interpretation of referring expressions in conversation is facilitated by referential domains constrained by pragmatic factors that predict when addressees are likely to encounter temporary ambiguity in language processing.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Conversants tend to have highly coordinated postural sway and match each other's eye gaze, even when they cannot see their partner.
“conversants tend to have highly coordinated postural sway and match each other’s eye gaze, even when they cannot see their partner (Shockley et al., 2003; Richardson D.C. et al., 2007; Brown-Schmidt and Tanenhaus, 2008).”
From Synchrony in Psychotherapy: A Review and an Integrative Framework for the Therapeutic Alliance (2016) · cites this paper as Brown-Schmidt and Tanenhaus, 2008
Cites
Austin, J. L. (1975) · doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198245537.001.0001 · Cited by 21,496 · see citing works
Searle, J. R. (1969) · doi:10.1017/cbo9781139173438 · Cited by 11,718 · see citing works
Concurrent feedback, confirmation, and the encoding of referents in verbal communication.
Krauss, R. M., & Weinheimer, S. (1966) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/h0023705 · Cited by 342 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Synchrony in Psychotherapy: A Review and an Integrative Framework for the Therapeutic Alliance
Koole, S. L., & Tschacher, W. (2016) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00862 · Cited by 456 · see citing works
“Furthermore, conversants tend to have highly coordinated postural sway and match each other’s eye gaze, even when they cannot see their partner (Shockley et al., 2003; Richardson D.C. et al., 2007; Brown-Schmidt and Tanenhaus, 2008).”
BackgroundLanguage style matching in writing: synchrony in essays, correspondence, and poetry.
Ireland, M. E., & Pennebaker, J. W. (2010) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/a0020386 · Cited by 380 · see citing works
Colors in Context: A Pragmatic Neural Model for Grounded Language Understanding
Monroe, W., Hawkins, R. X. D., Goodman, N. D., & Potts, C. (2017) · Transactions of the Association for Computational Linguistics · doi:10.1162/tacl_a_00064 · Cited by 94 · see citing works
- Authors
- Brown‐Schmidt, S., & Tanenhaus, M. K.
- Affiliations
- University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign (US)
- University of Rochester (US)
- Corresponding author
- Brown‐Schmidt, Sarah
- Venue
- Cognitive Science
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2008-06
- Volume
- 32
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 643-684
- ISSN
- 0364-0213 (ISSN-L)
- 1551-6709
- PMC
- PMC2771881
- OpenAlex
- W2115811569
- Cited by
- 231
- References
- 3
- Citations by year
- 2026: 7 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 43 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 13 · 2016: 22 · 2015: 31 · 2014: 15 · 2013: 22 · 2012: 5
- FWCI
- 82.95
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Cognitive Science (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institutes of Health
- Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (R01HD027206)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › Language, Discourse, Communication Strategies
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › Syntax, Semantics, Linguistic Variation
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Language Development and Disorders
- Keywords
- referring expressions, eye movements, competition effects, pragmatic factors, referent selection, temporary ambiguity, language processing
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
