Perspective-Taking During Conversation

In conversation, each person has their own perspective which is shaped by their unique set of life experiences. Considering of how one’s own perspective is similar to, or different from, the perspective of their conversational partner is crucial in order to communicate effectively in conversation. Effects of perspective are found in both production and comprehension, from the message level, to sentence type and structure, to words and their sounds. This chapter provides a review of past and present literature on the representations of perspective and the underlying mechanisms that support use of perspective in conversation, outlining both the central empirical findings and the key theoretical positions. We also discuss future lines of inquiry that would be essential to maintaining progress in our understanding of this most basic phenomenon.

[1]  R. Krauss,et al.  Changes in reference phrases as a function of frequency of usage in social interaction: a preliminary study , 1964 .

[2]  David Lewis.  Convention: A Philosophical Study , 1986 .

[3]  A. Baddeley,et al.  Context-dependent memory in two natural environments: on land and underwater. , 1975 .

[4]  L. Ross,et al.  The “false consensus effect”: An egocentric bias in social perception and attribution processes , 1977 .

[5]  Steven M. Smith,et al.  Environmental context and human memory , 1978 .

[6]  M. Ross,et al.  Egocentric Biases in Availability and Attribution , 1979 .

[7]  Lyn Frazier,et al.  ON COMPREHENDING SENTENCES: SYNTACTIC PARSING STRATEGIES. , 1979 .

[8]  A. Baddeley,et al.  When does context influence recognition memory , 1980 .

[9]  A. Tversky,et al.  The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. , 1981, Science.

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

[11]  S. Baron-Cohen,et al.  Does the autistic child have a “theory of mind” ? , 1985, Cognition.

[12]  H. H. Clark,et al.  References in Conversation Between Experts and Novices , 1987 .

[13]  H. H. Clark,et al.  Concealing one's meaning from overhearers , 1987 .

[14]  Mark Steedman,et al.  Interaction with context during human sentence processing , 1988, Cognition.

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

[16]  Susan R. Fussell,et al.  Accuracy and bias in estimates of others' knowledge , 1991 .

[17]  M. Just,et al.  From the SelectedWorks of Marcel Adam Just 1992 A capacity theory of comprehension : Individual differences in working memory , 2017 .

[18]  Irene Heim,et al.  Presupposition Projection and the Semantics of Attitude Verbs , 1992, J. Semant..

[19]  M. Tanenhaus,et al.  Verb-specific constraints in sentence processing: Separating effects of lexical preference from garden-paths. , 1993 .

[20]  Julie C. Sedivy,et al.  Eye movements as a window into real-time spoken language comprehension in natural contexts , 1995, Journal of psycholinguistic research.

[21]  Julie C. Sedivy,et al.  Subject Terms: Linguistics Language Eyes & eyesight Cognition & reasoning , 1995 .

[22]  B. Keysar,et al.  When do speakers take into account common ground? , 1996, Cognition.

[23]  Julie C. Sedivy,et al.  Eye movements and spoken language comprehension: Effects of visual context on syntactic ambiguity resolution , 2002, Cognitive Psychology.

[24]  Christine A. Gunlogson.  True to Form: Rising and Falling Declaratives as Questions in English , 2003 .

[25]  S. Brennan,et al.  When conceptual pacts are broken: Partner-specific effects on the comprehension of referring expressions , 2003 .

[26]  M. Tanenhaus,et al.  Actions and affordances in syntactic ambiguity resolution. , 2004, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

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

[28]  Christopher Potts.  The logic of conventional implicatures , 2004 .

[29]  Michael K. Tanenhaus,et al.  Pragmatic effects on reference resolution in a collaborative task: evidence from eye movements , 2004, Cogn. Sci..

[30]  H. H. Clark,et al.  Speaking while monitoring addressees for understanding , 2004 .

[31]  William S. Horton,et al.  Conversational Common Ground and Memory Processes in Language Production , 2005 .

[32]  J. Trueswell,et al.  Cognitive control and parsing: Reexamining the role of Broca’s area in sentence comprehension , 2005, Cognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience.

[33]  D. Sperber,et al.  PSYCHOLOGICAL SCIENCE Research Article Attribution of Beliefs by 13-Month-Old Infants , 2022 .

[34]  Peter Hagoort,et al.  The Neural Integration of Speaker and Message , 2008, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[35]  D. Barr.  Pragmatic expectations and linguistic evidence: Listeners anticipate but do not integrate common ground , 2008, Cognition.

[36]  Irene Heim,et al.  On the Projection Problem for Presuppositions , 2008 .

[37]  R. Baillargeon,et al.  False-belief understanding in infants , 2010, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[38]  N. Mulligan.  Generation Disrupts Memory for Intrinsic Context but not Extrinsic Context , 2011, Quarterly journal of experimental psychology.

[39]  L. Bigot,et al.  Managing dialogue: How information availability affects collaborative reference production , 2012 .

[40]  Michael C. Frank,et al.  Predicting Pragmatic Reasoning in Language Games , 2012, Science.

[41]  Ramesh Kumar Mishra,et al.  Spoken language-mediated anticipatory eye- movements are modulated by reading ability - Evidence from Indian low and high literates , 2012 .

[42]  Noah D. Goodman,et al.  Knowledge and implicature: Modeling language understanding as social cognition , 2012, CogSci.

[43]  Craige Roberts,et al.  Information Structure: Towards an integrated formal theory of pragmatics , 2012 .

[44]  Daniel Casasanto,et al.  Pragmatics in Action: Indirect Requests Engage Theory of Mind Areas and the Cortical Motor Network , 2012, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[45]  Michael K. Tanenhaus,et al.  To Name or to Describe: Shared Knowledge Affects Referential Form , 2012, Top. Cogn. Sci..

[46]  Sarah Brown-Schmidt,et al.  Influence of perspective and goals on reference production in conversation , 2012, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[47]  Liane Wardlow.  Individual differences in speakers’ perspective taking: The roles of executive control and working memory , 2013, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[48]  Hannah Rohde,et al.  Aspects of a theory of pronoun interpretation , 2013 .

[49]  Maryellen C. MacDonald,et al.  How language production shapes language form and comprehension , 2012, Front. Psychol..

[50]  Kristen S. Gorman,et al.  What's learned together stays together: speakers' choice of referring expression reflects shared experience. , 2013, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[51]  C. Chambers,et al.  Would a blue kite by any other name be just as blue? Effects of descriptive choices on subsequent referential behavior , 2014 .

[52]  S. Brennan,et al.  Speakers adapt gestures to addressees' knowledge: implications for models of co-speech gesture , 2014 .

[53]  Elizabeth S. Nilsen,et al.  Children with stronger executive functioning and fewer ADHD traits produce more effective referential statements , 2015 .

[54]  Melanie C Steffens,et al.  Source and destination memory in face-to-face interaction: A multinomial modeling approach. , 2015, Journal of experimental psychology. Applied.

[55]  Sarah Brown-Schmidt,et al.  Journal of Experimental Psychology : General Perspective-Taking in Comprehension , Production , and Memory : An Individual Differences Approach , 2015 .

[56]  Suzanne Stevenson,et al.  Perspective-taking behavior as the probabilistic weighing of multiple domains , 2016, Cognition.

[57]  Si On Yoon,et al.  The historical context in conversation: Lexical differentiation and memory for the discourse history , 2016, Cognition.

[58]  H. H. Clark.  Depicting as a method of communication. , 2016, Psychological review.