Speakers gaze at objects while preparing intentionally inaccurate labels for them.

When describing scenes, speakers gaze at objects while preparing their names (Z. M. Griffin & K. Bock, 2000). In this study, the authors investigated whether gazes to referents occurred in the absence of a correspondence between visual features and word meaning. Speakers gazed significantly longer at objects before intentionally labeling them inaccurately with the names of similar things (e.g., calling a horse a dog) than when labeling them accurately. This held for grammatical subjects and objects as well as agents and patients. Moreover, the time spent gazing at a referent before labeling it with a novel word or accurate name was similar and decreased as speakers gained experience using the novel word. These results suggest that visual attention in speaking may be directed toward referents in the absence of any association between their visual forms and the words used to talk about them.

[1]  Daniel C. Richardson,et al.  Thinking outside the brain: Spatial indices to visual and linguistic Information. , 2004 .

[2]  Z. Pylyshyn Visual indexes, preconceptual objects, and situated vision , 2001, Cognition.

[3]  D. E. Irwin Fixation location and fixation duration as indices of cognitive processing , 2004 .

[4]  W. La Heij,et al.  A paradoxical exposure-duration effect in the Stroop task: temporal segregation between stimulus attributes facilitates selection. , 2001, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[5]  G. Frege On Sense and Reference , 1948 .

[6]  D. Kahneman,et al.  The reviewing of object files: Object-specific integration of information , 1992, Cognitive Psychology.

[7]  A. Meyer,et al.  Phonological priming effects on speech onset latencies and viewing times in object naming , 2000, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[8]  Bernhard Hommel,et al.  Responding to object files: Automatic integration of spatial information revealed by stimulus-response compatibility effects , 2002, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology. A, Human experimental psychology.

[9]  Fernanda Ferreira,et al.  Scene Perception for Psycholinguists. , 2004 .

[10]  A. Roelofs,et al.  A spreading-activation theory of lemma retrieval in speaking , 1992, Cognition.

[11]  M. Just,et al.  Eye fixations and cognitive processes , 1976, Cognitive Psychology.

[12]  D. E. Irwin,et al.  Minding the clock , 2003 .

[13]  Trevor A. Harley,et al.  Environmental contamination of normal speech , 1990, Applied Psycholinguistics.

[14]  Daniel C. Richardson,et al.  Looking To Understand: The Coupling Between Speakers' and Listeners' Eye Movements and Its Relationship to Discourse Comprehension , 2005, Cogn. Sci..

[15]  G. Humphreys,et al.  Hierarchies, similarity, and interactivity in object recognition: “Category-specific” neuropsychological deficits , 2001, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[16]  S. Lupker Picture Naming: An Investigation of the Nature of Categorical Priming , 1988 .

[17]  P. Ludlow Readings in the philosophy of language , 1999 .

[18]  Femke Van der Meulen Moving eyes and naming objects , 2001 .

[19]  Z. Griffin,et al.  The Eyes Are Right When the Mouth Is Wrong , 2004, Psychological science.

[20]  Stephen J. Lupker,et al.  The semantic nature of response competition in the picture-word interference task , 1979 .

[21]  A. Glenberg,et al.  Averting the gaze disengages the environment and facilitates remembering , 1998, Memory & cognition.

[22]  Wido La Heij,et al.  Picture Naming in Picture Context: Semantic Interference or Semantic Facilitation? , 2003 .

[23]  Dare A. Baldwin,et al.  Infants' contribution to the achievement of joint reference. , 1991, Child development.

[24]  Yuki Kamide,et al.  Now you see it, now you don't: mediating the mapping between language and the visual world , 2004 .

[25]  Wido La Heij,et al.  Semantic facilitation and semantic interference in word translation: Implications for models of lexical access in language production , 2003 .

[26]  Antje S Meyer,et al.  Processing of extrafoveal objects during multiple-object naming. , 2005, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[27]  W. Levelt,et al.  Eye movements during the production of nouns and pronouns , 2001, Memory & cognition.

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

[29]  Markus F Damian,et al.  Locus of semantic interference in picture-word interference tasks , 2003, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[30]  Z. Griffin Why Look? Reasons for Eye Movements Related to Language Production. , 2004 .

[31]  W. Glaser,et al.  Context effects in stroop-like word and picture processing. , 1989, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[32]  G W Humphreys,et al.  Top-down processes in object identification: evidence from experimental psychology, neuropsychology and functional anatomy. , 1997, Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences.

[33]  H. H. Clark The language-as-fixed-effect fallacy: A critique of language statistics in psychological research. , 1973 .

[34]  R. Lachman Uncertainty effects on time to access the internal lexicon. , 1973 .

[35]  I. Biederman,et al.  Scene perception: Detecting and judging objects undergoing relational violations , 1982, Cognitive Psychology.

[36]  Zenzi M. Griffin,et al.  Why Look? Reasons for Eye Movements Related to Language Production. , 2004 .

[37]  Dare A. Baldwin,et al.  Early referential understanding: Infants' ability to recognize referential acts for what they are. , 1993 .

[38]  Zenzi M. Griffin,et al.  PSYCHOLOGICAL SCIENCE Research Article WHAT THE EYES SAY ABOUT SPEAKING , 2022 .

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