Adjustment of speaker’s referential expressions to an addressee’s likely knowledge and link with theory of mind abilities

Abstract

To communicate cooperatively, speakers must determine what constitutes the common ground with their addressee and adapt their referential choices accordingly. Assessing another person’s knowledge requires a social cognition ability termed theory of mind (ToM). This study relies on a novel referential communication task requiring probabilistic inferences of the knowledge already held by an addressee prior to the study. Forty participants were asked to present 10 movie characters and the addressee, who had the same characters in a random order, was asked to place them in order. ToM and other aspects of social cognition were also assessed. Participants used more information when presenting likely unknown than likely known movie characters. They particularly increased their use of physical descriptors, which most often accompanied movie-related information. Interestingly, a significant relationship emerged between our ToM test and the increased amount of information given for the likely unknown characters. These results suggest that speakers use ToM to infer their addressee’s likely knowledge and accordingly adapt their referential expressions.

Words are not enough: how preschoolers’ integration of perspective and emotion informs their referential understanding

“…Although many researchers have proposed a theoretical link between children's mentalizing abilities and communicative perspective taking (Achim, Fossard, Couture & Achim, 2015; Nilsen & Fecica, 2011; Sperber & Wilson, 2002), only a handful of studies have directly examined the relation between these two capacities. This research has shown that three- to six-year-old children's accurate production and repair of referential statements is positively related to their performance on both visual perspective-taking tasks (Roberts & Patterson, 1983) as well as standard measures of false-belief understanding (Resches & Pereira, 2007).…”

Referential Choices in a Collaborative Storytelling Task: Discourse Stages and Referential Complexity Matter

“…However, including more information in a description than strictly necessary does not jeopardize communication (in this case, referent identification for the addressee). It would rather be to provide too little information—being referentially under-specific—that may be seen as reflecting an egocentric tendency, detrimental for communication (see also Achim et al, 2015 ).…”

Oscillatory brain activity differentially reflects false belief understanding and complementation syntax processing

“…People with FBU will be able to represent that when the boy comes back and looks for the chocolate, he will act on his false belief to look for the chocolate in the blue cupboard. FBU has been associated with a wide range of social and cognitive outcomes (Farrar et al, 2017b), including communication skills (Achim et al, 2015), peer popularity (Slaughter et al, 2015), and academic achievement (Blair & Razza, 2007). Deficits in FBU contribute to social impairments in autism spectrum disorders (Baron-Cohen et al, 1985), frontal variant frontotemporal dementia (fvFTD; Gregory et al, 2002), and substance use disorder (Sanvicente-Vieira et al, 2017), etc.…”