TY - JOUR
T1 - Social and configural effects on the cognitive dynamics of perspective-taking
AU - Galati, Alexia
AU - Dale, Rick
AU - Duran, Nicholas
N1 - Funding Information:
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under the Marie Sklodowska-Curie grant agreement No 705037 to A.G. We are thankful to Moreno Coco for useful discussions about statistical modeling. We are also thankful to Michele Burigo and two anonymous reviewers for their constructive comments. A.G. is now at the University of North Carolina at Charlotte.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2018 Elsevier Inc.
PY - 2019/2
Y1 - 2019/2
N2 - How do environmental cues and social perspectives influence perspective selection? Listeners responded to instructions (e.g., “Give me the folder on the right”) from a simulated partner, selecting from two objects consistently aligned with themselves (ego-aligned; Experiment 1a) or the speaker (other-aligned; Experiment1b). In Experiment 2, listeners selected from triangular 3-object configurations whose orientation varied (ego-, other-, or neither-aligned). When the configural cue was other-aligned (consistently or inconsistently: Experiments 1b and 2), listeners were more likely to be other-centric. Other-centric responders stabilized their strategy more quickly when the cue was other-aligned, but their mouse trajectories did not exhibit facilitation (Experiment 1b vs. 1a). In Experiment 2, other-centric responders showed sensitivity to the configural cue, making longer and more complex trajectories on neither-aligned configurations. That cue also influenced how listeners interpreted the front-back terms. Our findings suggest that configural cues can promote an other-centric strategy and its stabilization, influence response dynamics selectively, and impact the interpretation of spatial language.
AB - How do environmental cues and social perspectives influence perspective selection? Listeners responded to instructions (e.g., “Give me the folder on the right”) from a simulated partner, selecting from two objects consistently aligned with themselves (ego-aligned; Experiment 1a) or the speaker (other-aligned; Experiment1b). In Experiment 2, listeners selected from triangular 3-object configurations whose orientation varied (ego-, other-, or neither-aligned). When the configural cue was other-aligned (consistently or inconsistently: Experiments 1b and 2), listeners were more likely to be other-centric. Other-centric responders stabilized their strategy more quickly when the cue was other-aligned, but their mouse trajectories did not exhibit facilitation (Experiment 1b vs. 1a). In Experiment 2, other-centric responders showed sensitivity to the configural cue, making longer and more complex trajectories on neither-aligned configurations. That cue also influenced how listeners interpreted the front-back terms. Our findings suggest that configural cues can promote an other-centric strategy and its stabilization, influence response dynamics selectively, and impact the interpretation of spatial language.
KW - Audience design
KW - Cognitive dynamics
KW - Mouse-tracking
KW - Perspective-taking
KW - Spatial cognition
KW - Spatial instructions
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85053402365&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85053402365&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.jml.2018.08.007
DO - 10.1016/j.jml.2018.08.007
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85053402365
SN - 0749-596X
VL - 104
SP - 1
EP - 24
JO - Journal of Memory and Language
JF - Journal of Memory and Language
ER -