Effects of Conversational Pressures on Speech Planning

In ordinary conversation, speakers experience pressures both to produce utterances suited to particular addressees and to do so with minimal delay. To document the impact of these conversational pressures, our experiment asked participants to produce brief utterances to describe visual displays. We complicated utterance planning by including tangram figures that prohibited easy lexicalization. Participants completed the task in either the presence or absence of an addressee and also under circumstances of natural or explicit time pressure. Results suggested that speakers produce richer utterances with addressees present but that they do so efficiently, without sacrificing planning time. We propose a good-enough view of the language production system: We suggest that, much like the comprehension system, speech planning processes flexibly adapt to external task goals.

[1]  J. Jescheniak,et al.  On the flexibility of grammatical advance planning during sentence production: Effects of cognitive load on multiple lexical access. , 2010, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[2]  Albert Costa,et al.  The Production of Noun Phrases in English and Spanish: Implications for the Scope of Phonological Encoding in Speech Production☆ , 2002 .

[3]  Carrick C. Williams,et al.  Younger and Older Adults' "Good-Enough" Interpretations of Garden-Path Sentences , 2006, Discourse processes.

[4]  Roger P. G. van Gompel,et al.  Reanalysis in Sentence Processing: Evidence against Current Constraint-Based and Two-Stage Models , 2001 .

[5]  Annie Piolat,et al.  Verbal, visual, and spatial working memory in written language production. , 2007, Acta psychologica.

[6]  H. H. Clark,et al.  Hearers and speech acts , 1982 .

[7]  William S Horton,et al.  Age-related differences in communication and audience design. , 2007, Psychology and aging.

[8]  Robert J. Hartsuiker,et al.  Language production and working memory: The case of subject-verb agreement , 2006 .

[9]  D. Bates,et al.  Linear Mixed-Effects Models using 'Eigen' and S4 , 2015 .

[10]  M. Pickering,et al.  Why is conversation so easy? , 2004, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[11]  M. Pickering,et al.  Toward a mechanistic psychology of dialogue , 2004, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[12]  Markus F. Damian,et al.  Time pressure and phonological advance planning in spoken production , 2007 .

[13]  M. Ashcraft Cognitive arithmetic: A review of data and theory , 1992, Cognition.

[14]  S. Kemper,et al.  The structure of verbal abilities in young and older adults. , 2001, Psychology and aging.

[15]  G. Jefferson Preliminary notes on a possible metric which provides for a 'standard maximum' silence of approximately one second in conversation. , 1989 .

[16]  F. Ferreira,et al.  How incremental is language production? Evidence from the production of utterances requiring the computation of arithmetic sums , 2002 .

[17]  W. Levelt,et al.  Speaking: From Intention to Articulation , 1990 .

[18]  M. Tanenhaus,et al.  Watching the eyes when talking about size: An investigation of message formulation and utterance planning , 2006 .

[19]  J. K. Bock Syntactic persistence in language production , 1986, Cognitive Psychology.

[20]  H. Grice Logic and conversation , 1975 .

[21]  H. Schriefers Phonological Facilitation in the Production of Two-word Utterances , 1999 .

[22]  V. Ferreira Ambiguity, Accessibility, and a Division of Labor for Communicative Success. , 2008, Learning and motivation.

[23]  H. H. Clark,et al.  Understanding by addressees and overhearers , 1989, Cognitive Psychology.

[24]  H. H. Clark,et al.  Audience Design in Meaning and Reference , 1982 .

[25]  Gerard Kempen,et al.  An Incremental Procedural Grammar for Sentence Formulation , 1987, Cogn. Sci..

[26]  Jan McAllister,et al.  The Effect of Production Variables in Monolog and Dialog on Comprehension by Novel Listeners , 2001, Language and speech.

[27]  Mark C. Smith,et al.  High level processing scope in spoken sentence production , 1999, Cognition.

[28]  A. Sanford,et al.  Depth of processing in language comprehension: not noticing the evidence , 2002, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[29]  Linda Wheeldon,et al.  Syntactic priming in spoken sentence production – an online study , 2001, Cognition.

[30]  Fernanda Ferreira,et al.  The 'Good Enough' Approach to Language Comprehension , 2007, Lang. Linguistics Compass.

[31]  Kathryn Bock,et al.  Language production : Grammatical encoding , 1994 .

[32]  E. Schegloff,et al.  A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation , 1974 .

[33]  R. Krauss,et al.  Concurrent feedback, confirmation, and the encoding of referents in verbal communication. , 1966, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[34]  R. Baayen,et al.  Mixed-effects modeling with crossed random effects for subjects and items , 2008 .

[35]  Ardi Roelofs,et al.  Incrementality in naming and reading complex numerals: evidence from eyetracking , 2006, Quarterly journal of experimental psychology.

[36]  Antje S. Meyer,et al.  Please Scroll down for Article the Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Speech Planning during Multiple-object Naming: Effects of Ageing , 2022 .

[37]  Stephanie D. Teasley,et al.  Perspectives on socially shared cognition , 1991 .

[38]  Michael F. Schober,et al.  How beliefs about a partner's goals affect referring in goal‐discrepant conversations , 1999 .

[39]  B. Rossion,et al.  Revisiting Snodgrass and Vanderwart's Object Pictorial Set: The Role of Surface Detail in Basic-Level Object Recognition , 2004, Perception.

[40]  L Robert Slevc,et al.  Saying what's on your mind: working memory effects on sentence production. , 2011, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[41]  C. Clifton,et al.  Underspecification of syntactic ambiguities: Evidence from self-paced reading , 2008, Memory & cognition.

[42]  Fernanda Ferreira,et al.  Planning in sentence production: Evidence from a Free Word Order Language (Odawa) , 2005 .

[43]  R. Gerrig,et al.  Speakers’ experiences and audience design: knowing when and knowing how to adjust utterances to addressees☆ , 2002 .

[44]  Matthew E. Jacovina,et al.  Individual differences in the scope of speech planning: evidence from eye-movements* , 2014, Language and Cognition.

[45]  L. Reder,et al.  Locus of the Moses Illusion: Imperfect encoding, retrieval, or match? , 1991 .

[46]  F. Ferreira,et al.  Conceptual accessibility and sentence production in a free word order language (Odawa) , 2005, Cognition.

[47]  Philip R. Cohen,et al.  Referring as a Collaborative Process , 2003 .

[48]  W. Levelt,et al.  Viewing and naming objects: eye movements during noun phrase production , 1998, Cognition.

[49]  Herbert H. Clark,et al.  Grounding in communication , 1991, Perspectives on socially shared cognition.

[50]  Sarah Brown-Schmidt,et al.  Little houses and casas pequeñas: Message formulation and syntactic form in unscripted speech with speakers of English and Spanish , 2008, Cognition.

[51]  Zenzi M. Griffin,et al.  Gaze durations during speech reflect word selection and phonological encoding , 2001, Cognition.

[52]  Karl G. D. Bailey,et al.  Good-Enough Representations in Language Comprehension , 2002 .

[53]  T. Jaeger,et al.  Categorical Data Analysis: Away from ANOVAs (transformation or not) and towards Logit Mixed Models. , 2008, Journal of memory and language.

[54]  Susan Kemper,et al.  The costs of doing two things at once for young and older adults: talking while walking, finger tapping, and ignoring speech or noise. , 2003, Psychology and aging.