ArticlePsychonomic bulletin & review2022
Temporary ambiguity and memory for the context of spoken language.
Article in Psychonomic bulletin & review, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Moderate-severe traumatic brain injury disrupts core mechanisms of online language processing and use.Cortex; a journal devoted to the study of the nervous system and behavior · 2026Article
- Remembering conversation in group settings.Memory & cognition · 2025Article
- Temporary ambiguity and memory for the context of spoken language in adults with moderate-severe traumatic brain injury.Brain and language · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Spoken language is interpreted incrementally, with listeners considering multiple candidate meanings as words unfold over time. Due to incremental interpretation, when a speaker refers to something in the world, there is often temporary ambiguity regarding which of several candidate items in the referential context the speaker is referring to. Subsequent tests of recognition memory show that listeners have good memory for referenced items, but that listeners also sometimes recognize non-referenced items from the referential context that share features with items that were mentioned. Predicted or inferred (but not experienced) interpretations of what was said are also sometimes retained in memory. While these findings indicate that multiple items from the referential context may be encoded in memory, the mechanisms supporting memory for the context of language use remain poorly understood. This paper tests the hypothesis that a consequence of temporary ambiguity in spoken language is enhanced memory for the items in the referential context. Two experiments demonstrate that periods of temporary referential ambiguity boost memory for non-referenced items in the referential context. Items that temporarily matched the unfolding referring expression were better remembered than those that did not. The longer the period of ambiguity, the stronger the memory boost, particularly for items activated early in the expression. In sum, the fact that spoken language unfolds over time creates momentary ambiguity about the speaker's intention; this ambiguity, in turn, allows the listener to later remember not only what the speaker did say, but also what they could have, but did not.
Indexed as
Identifiers
35355223What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.