Can you keep a secret? Increasing speakers’ motivation to keep information confidential yields poorer outcomes

It's Not You, It's Me: A Review of Individual Differences in Visuospatial Perspective Taking

Visuospatial perspective taking (VSPT) concerns the ability to understand something about the visual relationship between an agent or observation point on the one hand and a target or scene on the other. Despite its importance to a wide variety of other abilities, from communication to navigation, and decades of research, there is as yet no theory of VSPT. Indeed, the heterogeneity of results from different (and sometimes the same) VSPT tasks point to a complex picture suggestive of multiple VSPT strategies, individual differences in performance, and context-specific factors that together have a bearing on both the efficiency and accuracy of outcomes. In this article, we review the evidence in search of patterns in the data. We found a number of predictors of VSPT performance but also a number of gaps in understanding that suggest useful pathways for future research and, possibly, a theory (or theories) of VSPT. Overall, this review makes the case for understanding VSPT by better understanding the perspective taker rather than the target agents or their perception.

Lifting the curse of knowing: How feedback improves perspective-taking

People are likely to use their own knowledge as a frame of reference when they try to assess another person’s perspective. Due to this egocentric anchoring, people often overestimate the extent to which others share their point of view. This study investigated which type of feedback (if any) stimulates perceivers to make estimations of another person’s perspective that are less biased by egocentric knowledge. We allocated participants to one of the three feedback conditions (no feedback, accuracy feedback, narrative feedback). Findings showed that participants who were given feedback adjusted their perspective-judgement more than those who did not receive feedback. They also showed less egocentric projection on future assessments. Participants adjusted their perspective within the same trial to the same degree for both feedback types. However, participants’ egocentric bias was only reduced when they received narrative feedback and not when they received accuracy feedback about their performance. Implications of these findings for theories of perspective-taking are discussed.

Perspective-Taking in Referential Communication: Does Stimulated Attention to Addressees' Perspective Influence Speakers' Reference Production?

In two experiments, we investigated whether speakers' referential communication benefits from an explicit focus on addressees' perspective. Dyads took part in a referential communication game and were allocated to one of three experimental settings. Each of these settings elicited a different perspective mind-set (baseline, self-focus, other-focus). In the two perspective settings, speakers were explicitly instructed to regard their addressees' (other-focus) or their own (self-focus) perspective before construing their referential message. Results evidenced speakers' egocentricity bias. Even though speakers were explicitly aware of addressees' informational need, speakers still referred to information not known to their addressee. Speakers' self-reported perspective-taking behavior correlated with their actual reference behavior. Those who reported to have regarded addressees' perspective were also less likely to have leaked information about their own knowledge and attentional state. Findings are discussed in light of speakers' egocentricity bias and the role of speaker-addressee collaboration in language production.

A new experimental paradigm to study children's processing of their parent's unscripted language input

This paper introduces a new experimental paradigm for studying children's real-time language processing of their parents' unscripted speech. Focusing on children's processing of referential expressions, or the phrases that parents used to label particular objects, we engaged dyads in a game in which parents labeled one of several objects displayed on a screen, and the child was to quickly identify it as their eye gaze was tracked. There were two conditions; one included a competitor object (e.g., the target was a striped umbrella and the display also included an umbrella with polka dots), while the other one did not (e.g., only one umbrella was present). The results revealed evidence of children's incremental processing of their parents' referential expressions. They also showed faster processing of postnominally-modified as compared to prenominally-modified referential expressions. Parents tended to produce postnominally-modified referential expressions in the more difficult experimental condition in which there was a competitor object, suggesting either that these expressions are also easier for them to produce, or that they accommodate their children by producing more easily processed expressions. We discuss the potential of this paradigm for advancing theories of the relationship between child-directed language input and children's language processing.

Deception and Cognitive Load: Expanding Our Horizon with a Working Memory Model

Recently, studies on deception and its detection have increased dramatically. Many of these studies rely on the “cognitive load approach” as the sole explanatory principle to understand deception. These studies have been exclusively on lies about negative actions (usually lies of suspects of [mock] crimes). Instead, we need to re-focus more generally on the cognitive processes involved in generating both lies and truths, not just on manipulations of cognitive load. Using Baddeley’s (2000, 2007, 2012) working memory model, which integrates verbal and visual processes in working memory with retrieval from long-term memory and control of action, not only verbal content cues but also nonverbal, paraverbal, and linguistic cues can be investigated within a single framework. The proposed model considers long-term semantic, episodic and autobiographical memory and their connections with working memory and action. It also incorporates ironic processes of mental control (Wegner, 1994, 2009), the role of scripts and schemata and retrieval cues and retrieval processes. Specific predictions of the model are outlined and support from selective studies is presented. The model is applicable to different types of reports, particularly about lies and truths about complex events, and to different modes of production (oral, hand-written, typed). Predictions regarding several moderator variables and methods to investigate them are proposed.

White bear effects in language production: evidence from the prosodic realization of adjectives

A central problem in recent research on speech production concerns the question to what extent speakers adapt their linguistic expressions to the needs of their addressees. It is claimed that speakers sometimes leak information about objects that are only visible for them and not for their listeners. Previous research only takes the occurrence of adjectives as evidence for the leakage of privileged information. The present study hypothesizes that leaked information is also encoded in the prosody of those adjectives. A production experiment elicited adjectives that leak information and adjectives that do not leak information. An acoustic analysis and prominence rating task showed that adjectives that leak information were uttered with a higher pitch and perceived as more prominent compared to adjectives that do not leak information. Furthermore, a guessing task suggested that the adjectives' prosody relates to how listeners infer possible privileged information.

Individual differences in speakers' perspective taking: the roles of executive control and working memory

Both speaking and listening require taking into account the perspective of one's communicative partner. Is perspective taking a domain-specific process internal to the language production and comprehension systems? Or is it a domain-general process regulated by the same mechanisms that are used to regulate other forms of behavior? Past research has shown that listeners' perspective taking is at least partially regulated by inhibitory control and working memory (WM), suggesting that it may be best thought of in domain-general terms. The present experiment was designed to explore individual differences in nonlinguistic executive functioning in order to assess whether domain-general mechanisms help regulate speakers' perspective-taking behavior. A group of 60 speakers participated in a referential communication task and in tasks measuring WM and executive control (EC). The results revealed that WM and EC were both predictive of the speakers' perspective taking, suggesting that perspective taking may be regulated by domain-general mechanisms.