Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35556197›Full record

ArticleJournal of psycholinguistic research2022

Speaker-Specific Cues Influence Semantic Disambiguation.

Catherine Davies, Vincent Porretta, Kremena Koleva, Ekaterini Klepousniotou

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of psycholinguistic research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 29% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Catherine DaviesSchool of Languages, Cultures, and Societies, University of Leeds, LS2 9JT, Leeds, UK. c.n.davies@leeds.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9347-7905
Vincent PorrettaDepartment of Linguistics and Languages, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
Kremena KolevaSchool of Languages, Cultures, and Societies, University of Leeds, LS2 9JT, Leeds, UK.
Ekaterini KlepousniotouSchool of Psychology, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
University of Leeds · GBMcMaster University · CA

Funding

University of Leeds SRDF2015-16/2
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Addressees use information from specific speakers' previous discourse to make predictions about incoming linguistic material and to restrict the choice of potential interpretations. In this way, speaker specificity has been shown to be an influential factor in language processing across several domains e.g., spoken word recognition, sentence processing, and pragmatics. However, its influence on semantic disambiguation has received little attention to date. Using an exposure-test design and visual world eye tracking, we examined the effect of speaker-specific literal vs. nonliteral style on the disambiguation of metaphorical polysemes such as 'fork', 'head', and 'mouse'. Eye movement data revealed that when interpreting polysemous words with a literal and a nonliteral meaning, addressees showed a late-stage preference for the literal meaning in response to a nonliteral speaker. We interpret this as reflecting an indeterminacy in the intended meaning in this condition, as well as the influence of meaning dominance cues at later stages of processing. Response data revealed that addressees then ultimately resolved to the literal target in 90% of trials. These results suggest that addressees consider a range of senses in the earlier stages of processing, and that speaker style is a contextual determinant in semantic processing.

Indexed as

CuesSemanticsEye MovementsHumansLanguageLinguisticsPolysemySemantic ambiguitySpeaker specificitySpoken word recognitionVisual world eye tracking

Identifiers

PMID35556197
PMCPMC9579068
OpenAlexW2779931720

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.