参照性交流中的“听者设计”

摘要/Abstract

摘要： “听者设计”一直是参照性交流研究领域中的热点。参照性交流过程中交流者通常会根据对交流同伴共享信息的评估来调整自己的行为,但是这些调整什么时候以及怎样发生的机制问题仍然存在争论。重点评述了“听者设计”的已有研究角度和研究进展,并归纳总结了参照惯例视角、记忆和注意视角、交流情境视角的研究观点。未来研究应扩展已有研究设计,以深入探查“听者设计”的形成、获得、发展变化过程,以及其与参照性交流其他限制因素间的相互作用;需要结合行为证据和眼动、脑成像证据等以帮助揭示“听者设计”过程的行为特点与认知机制。

关键词: 参照性交流, 听者设计, 参照惯例, 记忆, 注意

Abstract: "Audience design" has been a hot spot in the research of referential communication. The communicators usually adjust their behavior based on the assessment of shared information in the process of referential communication. But when and how to adjust behavior are still in dispute. This thesis reviewed the existing research perspectives and research progress of "audience design", and summarized the perspectives of referential convention, memory and attention, communication situation. Future studies should extend the existing research design to explore the formation, acquisition, development of "audience design" and the interaction between "audience design" and other limited factors by the control of information of communicators. It requires a combination of behavioral evidences and eye movement evidences, brain imaging evidences to help reveal the behavioral characteristics and cognitive mechanisms of "audience design".

Key words: referential communication, audience design, referential convention, memory, attention

中图分类号:

B844.3

张恒超. 参照性交流中的“听者设计”[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2013, 29(5): 552-560.

ZHANG Heng-chao. “Audience Design” of Referential Communication[J]. Psychological Development and Education, 2013, 29(5): 552-560.

参考文献

Araban, S., Zainalipour, H., Saadi, R. H. R., Javdan, M., Sezide, K., & Sajjadi, S. (2012). Study of cooperative learning effects on self-efficacy and academic achievement in English lesson of high school students. Journal of Basic and Applied Scientific Research, 2(9), 8524-8526.

Arnold, J. E., Tanenhaus, M. K., Altmann, R. J., & Fagnano, M. (2004). The old and thee, uh, new. Psychological Science, 15, 578-582.

Bangerter, A., & Clark, H. H. (2003). Navigating joint projects with dialogue. Cognitive Science, 27(2), 195-225.

Barr, D. J., & Keysar, B. (2002). Anchoring comprehension in linguistic precedents. Journal of Memory and Language, 46, 391-418.

Bezuidenhout, A. (2012). Perspective taking in conversation: A defense of speaker non-egocentricity. Journal of Pragmatics, in press.

Bögels, S., Schriefers, H., Vonk, W., & Chwilla, D. J. (2011). Pitch accents in context: How listeners process accentuation in referential communication. Neuropsychologia, 49, 2022-2036.

Branigan, H. P., Pickering, M. J., & Cleland, A. A. (2000). Syntactic co-ordination in dialogue. Cognition, 75(2), B13-B25.

Brennan, S. E., Chen, X., Dickinson, C. A., Neider, M. B., & Zelinsky, G. J. (2008). Coordinating cognition: The costs and benefits of shared gaze during collaborative search. Cognition, 106(3), 1465-1477.

Brennan, S. E., & Hanna, J. E. (2009). Partner-specific adaptation in dialog. Topics in Cognitive Science, 1, 274-291.

Brown-Schmidt, S. (2009a). The role of executive function in perspective taking during online language comprehension. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 16(5), 893-900.

Brown-Schmidt, S. (2009b). Partner-specific interpretation of maintained referential precedents during interactive dialog. Journal of Memory and Language, 61(2), 171-190.

Brown-Schmidt, S., Gunlogson, C., & Tanenhaus, M. K. (2008). Addressees distinguish shared from private information when interpreting questions during interactive conversation. Cognition, 107, 1122-1134.

Chambers, C. G., Tanenhaus, M. K., Eberhard, K. M., Filip, H., & Carlson, G. N. (2002). Circumscribing referential domains during real-time language comprehension. Journal of Memory and Language, 47, 30-49.

Clark, H. H. (1996). Using language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Clark, H. H., & Havilland, S.E. (1977). Comprehension and the given-new contract. In: R. O Freedle (Ed.), Discourse production and comprehension, (pp. 1-40). Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation.

Clark, H. H., & Murphy, G. L. (1982). Audience design in meaning and reference. In J.-F. LeNy & W. Kintsch (Eds.), Language and comprehension. Amsterdam: North-Holland.

Clark, H. H., & Wilkes-Gibbs, D. (1986). Referring as a collaborative process. Cognition, 22(1), 1-39.

Darnon, C., & Butera, F. (2007). Learning or succeeding? Conflict regulation with mastery or performance goals. Swiss Journal of Psychology, 66(3), 145-152.

Darnon, C.,& Muller, D. (2006). Mastery and performance goals predict epistemic and relational conflict regulation. Journal of Educational psychology, 98(4), 766-776.

Epley, N., Keysar, B., VanBoven, L., & Gilovich, T. (2004). Perspective taking as egocentric anchoring and adjustment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87, 327-339.

Frank, M. C., & Goodman, N. D. (2012). Predicting pragmatic reasoning in language games. Science, 336, 998-1007.

Galati, A., & Brennan, S. E. (2010). Attenuating information in Spoken Communication: For the speaker, or for the addressee? Journal of Memory and Language, 62, 35-51.

Gallagher, H. L., & Frith, C. D. (2003). Functional imaging of “theory of mind”. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7(2), 77-83.

Haywood, S. L., Pickering, M. J., & Branigan, H. P. (2005). Do speakers avoid ambiguities during dialog? Psychological Science, 16, 362-366.

Heller, D., Gorman, K. S., & Tanenhaus, M. K. (2012). To name or to describe: shared knowledge affects referential form. Topics in Cognitive Science, 4(2), 290-305.

Heller, D., Grodner, D., & Tanenhaus, M. K. (2008). The role of perspective in identifying domains of reference. Cognition, 108, 831-836.

Holler, J., & Wilkin, K. (2011). Co-Speech gesture mimicry in the process of collaborative referring during Face-to-Face dialogue. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 35(2), 133-153.

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.

Horton, W. S., & Gerrig, R. J. (2005). The impact of memory demands on audience design during language production. Cognition, 96, 127-142.

Jennifer, E. A., Jason, M. K., & Giulia, P. (2012). Audience design affects acoustic reduction via production facilitation. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 19(3), 505-525.

Kaplan, F., & Hafner, V. V. (2006). The challenges of joint attention. Interaction Studies, 7(2), 135-169.

Keysar, B., Lin, S., & Barr, D. J. (2003). Limits on theory of mind use in adults. Cognition, 89(1), 25-41.

Krauss, R. M., & Weinheimer, S. (1964). Changes in reference phrases as a function of frequency of usage in social interaction: A preliminary study. Psychonomic Science, 1, 113-114.

Kristen, S. G., Whitney, G., Chelsea, R. M.,& Michael, K. T. (2011). Memory representations supporting speakers' choice of referring expression: Effects of category overlap and shared experience. The 33rd Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society(CogSci11). Boston, MA.

Kronmüller, E., & Barr, D. J. (2007). Perspective free pragmatics: Broken precedents and the recovery from preemption hypothesis. Journal of Memory and Language, 56(3), 436-455.

Lockridge, C. B. (2007). Impact of working memory span on referring in conversation. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. State University of New York: Stony Brook, NY.

Malt, B. C., Sloman, S. A., & Gennari, S. (2003a). Speaking vs. thinking about objects and actions. In D. Gentner & G. S. Meadow (Eds.), Language in Mind: Advances in the Study of Language and Thought (pp. 81-111). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Malt, B. C., Sloman, S. A., & Gennari, S. (2003b). Universality and language specificity in object naming. Journal of Memory and Language, 49(1), 20-42.

Markman, A. B., & Makin, V. S. (1998). Referential communication and category acquisition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 127(4), 331-354.

Metzing, C., & Brennan, S. E. (2003). When conceptual pacts are broken: Partnerspecific effects in the comprehension of referring expressions. Journal of Memory and Language, 49, 201-213.

Mills, G. J. (2011). The emergence of procedural conventions in dialogue. In Proceedings of the 33rd Annual Conference of CogSci. Boston. USA.

Nicholas, D. D., Rick, D., & Roger, J. K. (2011). Listeners invest in an assumed other's perspective despite cognitive cost. Cognition, 121, 22-40.

Pickering, M. J., & Garrod, S. (2006). Alignment as the basis for successful communication. Research on Language & Computation, 4(2), 203-228.

Ruiter, J. P., Bangerter, A., & Dings, P. (2012). The interplay between gesture and speech in the production of referring expressions: Investigating the tradeoff hypothesis. Topics in Cognitive Science, 4, 232-248.

Schober, M. F., & Clark, H. H. (1989). Understanding by addressees and overhearers. Cognitive Psychology, 21, 211-232.

Shintel, H., & Keysar, B. (2009). Less is more: A minimalist account of joint action in communication. Topics in Cognitive Science, 1(2), 260-273.

Stalnaker, R. C. (2002). Common ground. Linguistics and Philosophy, 25(5-6), 701-721.

Tyl'en, K., Weed, E., Wallentin, M., Roepstorff, A., & Frith, C. (2010). Language as a tool for interacting minds. Mind & Language, 25(1), 3-29.

Weldon, M. S., & Bellinger, K. D. (1997). Collective memory: Collaborative and individual processes in remembering. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 23, 1160-1175.

Wilkes-Gibbs, D., & Clark, H.(1992). Coordinating beliefs in conversation. Journal of Memory and Language, 31(2), 183-194.

Yoon, S. O., Koh, S., & Brown-Schmidt, S. (2012). Influence of perspective and goals on reference production in conversation. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 19(4), 699-707.

Yu, C., Schermerhorn, P., & Scheutz, M. (2012). Adaptive eye gaze patterns in interactions with human and artificial agents. Transactions on Interactive Intelligent Systems, 1(2), 13-43.

张恒超, 阴国恩. (2010). 学习方式对关系类别间接性学习的影响. 心理与行为研究, 8(4), 257-262.

张恒超, 阴国恩. (2012a). 关系复杂性对关系类别间接性学习的影响. 心理发展与教育, 28(2), 193-200.

张恒超, 阴国恩. (2012b). 关系复杂性对关系类别间接性学习中选择性注意的影响. 心理科学, 35(4), 823-828.

张恒超, 阴国恩. (2012c). 关系复杂性对关系类别间接性学习分类的影响. 西南大学学报(自然科学版), 34(8), 138-144.

多维度评价

Viewed

Full text

Abstract

Cited

Shared

Discussed

[1]	陈书玲, 贾会宾, 靳璨, 张欣, 王恩国. 发展性协调障碍儿童视觉通道前注意加工的特点：来自ERP的证据[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2024, 40(1): 19-28.
[2]	谢和平, 王燕青, 王福兴, 周宗奎, 邓素娥, 段朝辉. 记忆的生成绘图效应及其边界条件：一项元分析[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2024, 40(1): 29-43.
[3]	彭越, 张和颐, 陈英和, 雷秀雅, 戚玥, 于晓, 乔学文, 刘沫漩, 颜露懿. 类比推理策略与工作记忆、抑制控制关系的年龄差异[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2023, 39(6): 761-771.
[4]	张弘弛, 毛伟宾, 崔慧园, 安姝, 李庆元. 价值对老年人项目记忆和联结记忆的影响[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2023, 39(5): 625-634.
[5]	李甜甜, 董会芹. 父母冲突知觉与儿童焦虑情绪:正负性信息注意偏向的中介作用及性别的调节作用[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2023, 39(4): 488-496.
[6]	金星, 刘景弘, 马跃, 于战宇. 聋童和正常儿童身体表情注意瞬脱的比较研究[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2023, 39(3): 305-312.
[7]	张妍, 王峥, 罗娜, 王小莹, 李晓南. 失恋经历对爱情相关刺激注意偏向的影响:趋近还是回避？[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2023, 39(1): 12-20.
[8]	陈子循, 李金文, 王雨萌, 刘霞. 累积环境风险与大学生自伤的关系:情绪调节策略的作用[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2023, 39(1): 109-120.
[9]	宋佳汝, 刘媛媛, 王秀礼, 李寿欣. 视觉与言语工作记忆表征对视觉注意的引导[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2022, 38(5): 609-617.
[10]	温凯玲, 陈萍, 杨双, 宁宁. 前摄干扰对汉语听写困难儿童字形工作记忆的影响[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2022, 38(2): 153-160.
[11]	吴国婧, 程雪林, 李叶, 白荣, 邢淑芬, 李玉华. 学前期儿童执行功能和语言的双向关系:社会经济地位的调节[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2022, 38(2): 186-194.
[12]	许郡婷, 鲍未, 罗俊龙. 不稳定控制感剥夺损害工作记忆刷新功能[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2022, 38(1): 1-9.
[13]	郭滢, 肖红蕊, 龚先旻, 王大华. 情绪影响错误记忆认知机制的年龄差异[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2022, 38(1): 17-25.
[14]	吴瑕, 钟希苹, 姜云鹏. 不同搜索情境下老化对自上而下注意加工的影响[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2022, 38(1): 26-34.
[15]	龙翼婷, 姜英杰, 缴润凯. 编码和提取水平对儿童绑定加工发展的影响[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2021, 37(6): 761-767.