Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t8hqh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T19:02:48.309Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

What is the context of prediction?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 June 2013

Si On Yoon  and
Sarah Brown-Schmidt
Si On Yoon
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, University of Illinois, Champaign, IL 61820. [email protected]
Sarah Brown-Schmidt
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, Beckman Institute for Advanced Science and Technology, University of Illinois, Champaign, IL 61820. [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

We agree with Pickering & Garrod's (P&G's) claim that theories of language processing must address the interconnection of language production and comprehension. However, we have two concerns: First, the central notion of context when predicting what another person will say is underspecified. Second, it is not clear that P&G's dual-mechanism model captures the data better than a single-mechanism model would.

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 36 , Issue 4 , August 2013 , pp. 376 - 377
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2013 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Brown-Schmidt, S. & Tanenhaus, M. K. (2008) Real-time investigation of referential domains in unscripted conversation: A targeted language game approach. Cognitive Science 32:643–84.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Clark, H. H. (1996) Using language. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Federmeier, K. D. & Kutas, M. (1999) A rose by any other name: Long-term memory structure and sentence processing. Journal of Memory and Language 41:469–95.Google Scholar
Ferguson, H. J., Scheepers, C. & Sanford, A. J. (2010) Expectations in counterfactual and theory of mind reasoning. Language and Cognitive Processes 25:297–346.Google Scholar
Greene, S. B., McKoon, G. & Ratcliff, R. (1992) Pronoun resolution and discourse models. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 18:266–83.Google Scholar
Hanna, J. E., Tanenhaus, M. K. & Trueswell, J. C. (2003) The effects of common ground and perspective on domains of referential interpretation. Journal of Memory and Language 49:43–61.Google Scholar
Heller, D., Grodner, D. & Tanenhaus, M. K. (2008) The role of perspective in identifying domains of references. Cognition 108:831–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nieuwland, M. S., Otten, M. & Van Berkum, J. J. A. (2007) Who are you talking about? Tracking discourse-level referential processes with ERPs. The Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 19:1–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pickering, M. J. & Garrod, S. (2004) Toward a mechanistic psychology of dialogue. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 27(2):169–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Richardson, D. C., Dale, R. & Kirkham, N. Z. (2007) The art of conversation is coordination. Psychological Science 18:407–13.Google Scholar
Trueswell, J. C. & Tanenhaus, M. K. (ed.) (2005) Processing world-situated language: Bridging the language-as-action and language-as-product traditions. MIT Press.Google Scholar
Wilkes-Gibbs, D. & Clark, H. H. (1992) Coordinating beliefs in conversation. Journal of Memory and Language, 31:183–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yoon, S. O., Koh, S. & Brown-Schmidt, S. (2012) Influence of perspective and goals on reference production in conversation. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 19:699–707.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed