TY - JOUR
T1 - Representation of others’ synchronous and asynchronous sentences interferes with sentence production
AU - Gambi, Chiara
AU - Van de Cavey, Joris
AU - Pickering, Martin J.
N1 - Funding Information:
The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: C.G. was supported by a scholarship from the School of Philosophy, Psychology, and Language Sciences, University of Edinburgh. J.V.d.C. was supported by an EU Erasmus scholarship to visit the University of the Edinburgh.
PY - 2022/2/1
Y1 - 2022/2/1
N2 - In dialogue, people represent each other’s utterances to take turns and communicate successfully. In previous work, speakers who were naming single pictures or picture pairs represented whether another speaker was engaged in the same task (vs a different or no task) concurrently but did not represent in detail the content of the other speaker’s utterance. Here, we investigate the co-representation of whole sentences. In three experiments, pairs of speakers imagined each other producing active or passive descriptions of transitive events. Speakers took longer to begin speaking when they believed their partner was also preparing to speak, compared to when they did not. Interference occurred when speakers believed their partners were preparing to speak at the same time as them (synchronous production and co-representation; Experiment 1), and also when speakers believed that their partner would speak only after them (asynchronous production and co-representation; Experiments 2a and 2b). However, interference was generally no greater when speakers believed their partner was preparing a different compared to a similar utterance, providing no consistent evidence that speakers represented what their partners were preparing to say. Taken together, these findings indicate that speakers can represent another’s intention to speak even as they are themselves preparing to speak, but that such representation tends to lack detail.
AB - In dialogue, people represent each other’s utterances to take turns and communicate successfully. In previous work, speakers who were naming single pictures or picture pairs represented whether another speaker was engaged in the same task (vs a different or no task) concurrently but did not represent in detail the content of the other speaker’s utterance. Here, we investigate the co-representation of whole sentences. In three experiments, pairs of speakers imagined each other producing active or passive descriptions of transitive events. Speakers took longer to begin speaking when they believed their partner was also preparing to speak, compared to when they did not. Interference occurred when speakers believed their partners were preparing to speak at the same time as them (synchronous production and co-representation; Experiment 1), and also when speakers believed that their partner would speak only after them (asynchronous production and co-representation; Experiments 2a and 2b). However, interference was generally no greater when speakers believed their partner was preparing a different compared to a similar utterance, providing no consistent evidence that speakers represented what their partners were preparing to say. Taken together, these findings indicate that speakers can represent another’s intention to speak even as they are themselves preparing to speak, but that such representation tends to lack detail.
KW - sentence production
KW - picture description
KW - co-representation
KW - joint action
KW - imagination
U2 - 10.1177/17470218221080766
DO - 10.1177/17470218221080766
M3 - Article
SN - 1747-0218
JO - Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology
JF - Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology
ER -