Titre :

Direct and indirect measures of common ground in dialogue studies involving a matching task: A systematic review

Auteur(s) :

Bovet, Vincent [Auteur]
Université de Neuchâtel = University of Neuchatel [UNINE]
Knutsen, Dominique [Auteur]
Laboratoire Sciences Cognitives et Sciences Affectives - UMR 9193 [SCALab]
Fossard, Marion [Auteur]
Université de Neuchâtel = University of Neuchatel [UNINE]
Fossard, Marion [Auteur]

Titre de la revue :

Psychonomic Bulletin & Review

Date de publication :

2023-08-15

Mot(s)-clé(s) en anglais :

Dialogue
Common ground
Language production
Collaborative approach
Matching task

Discipline(s) HAL :

Sciences cognitives

Résumé en anglais : [en]

During dialogue, speakers attempt to adapt messages to their addressee appropriately by taking into consideration their common ground (i.e., all the information mutually known by the conversational partners) to ensure ...
Lire la suite >During dialogue, speakers attempt to adapt messages to their addressee appropriately by taking into consideration their common ground (i.e., all the information mutually known by the conversational partners) to ensure successful communication. Knowing and remembering what information is part of the common ground shared with a given partner and using it during dialogue are crucial skills for social interaction. It is therefore important to better understand how we can measure the use of common ground and to identify the potential associated psychological processes. In this context, a systematic review of the literature was performed to list the linguistic measures of common ground found in dialogue studies involving a matching task and to explore any evidence of cognitive and social mechanisms underlying common ground use in this specific experimental setting, particularly in normal aging and in neuropsychological studies. Out of the twenty-three articles included in this review, we found seven different linguistic measures of common ground that were classified as either a direct measure of common ground (i.e., measures directly performed on the referential content) or an indirect measure of common ground (i.e., measures assessing the general form of the discourse). This review supports the idea that both types of measures should systematically be used while assessing common ground because they may reflect different concepts underpinned by distinct psychological processes. Given the lack of evidence for the implication of other cognitive and social functions in common ground use in studies involving matching tasks, future research is warranted, particularly in the clinical field.Lire moins >

Langue :

Anglais

Comité de lecture :

Oui

Audience :

Internationale

Vulgarisation :

Non

Établissement(s) :

Université de Lille
CNRS
CHU Lille

Collections :

• Sciences Cognitives et Sciences Affectives (SCALab) - UMR 9193

Équipe(s) de recherche :

Équipe Langage

Date de dépôt :

2023-09-01T13:47:35Z
2023-09-04T09:41:40Z
2023-12-19T14:58:13Z