The representational structure of linguistic understanding

References

• Balcerak Jackson, B. 2019. “Against the Perceptual Model of Utterance Comprehension.” Philosophical Studies 176 (2): 387–405. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11098-017-1021-3.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Begg, I. M., A. Anas, and S. Farinacci. 1992. “Dissociation of Processes in Belief: Source Recollection, Statement Familiarity, and the Illusion of Truth.” Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 121 (4): 446–458. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.121.4.446.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bond, C. F., and B. M. DePaulo. 2006. “Accuracy of Deception Judgments.” Personality and Social Psychology Review 10 (3): 214–234. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327957pspr1003_2.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Borsky, S., B. Tuller, and L. P. Shapiro. 1998. ““How to Milk a Coat:” The Effects of Semantic and Acoustic Information on Phoneme Categorization.” The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 103 (5): 2670–2676. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.422787.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Connine, C. M., and C. Clifton. 1987. “Interactive use of Lexical Information in Speech Perception.” Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 13 (2): 291–299. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.13.2.291.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Drożdżowicz, A. 2023. “Do we Hear Meanings? – Between Perception and Cognition.” Inquiry, 1–33. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020174X.2019.1612774.
   Google Scholar
• Drożdżowicz, A. ms. Varieties of Linguistic Understanding - On How We Engage with Linguistic Information.
   Google Scholar
• Evans, G. 1982. The Varieties of Reference. New York: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Falandays, J. B., B. J. Batzloff, S. C. Spevack, and M. J. Spivey. 2020. “Interactionism in Language: From Neural Networks to Bodies to Dyads.” Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/23273798.2018.1501501.
   Google Scholar
• Fricker, E. 1994. “Against Gullibility.” In Knowing from Words. Synthese Library, Vol. 230, edited by A. Chakrabarti, and B. K. Matilal. Dordrecht: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Fricker, E. 1995. “Critical Notice.” Mind 104 (414): 393–411. https://doi.org/10.1093/mind/104.414.393.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fricker, E. 2003. “Understanding and Knowledge of What is Said.” In Epistemology of Language, edited by A. Barber, 325–366. New York: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gawronski, B., J. Sherman, and Y. Trope. 2014. “Two of What? A Conceptual Analysis of Dual-Process Theories.” In Dual-process Theories of the Social Mind, edited by B. Gawronski, J. Sherman, and Y. Trope, 3–19. New York: Guilford Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gilbert, Daniel T. 1991. “How Mental Systems Believe.” American Psychologist 46 (2): 107–119. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.46.2.107.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gilbert, Daniel T., D. S. Krull, and P. S. Malone. 1990. “Unbelieving the Unbelievable: Some Problems in the Rejection of False Information.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 59 (4): 601–613. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.59.4.601.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gilbert, D. T., R. W. Tafarodi, and P. S. Malone. 1993. “You Can’t Not Believe Everything You Read.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 65 (2): 221–233. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.65.2.221.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grodniewicz, J. P. 2021. “The Process of Linguistic Understanding.” Synthese 198 (12): 11463–11481. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-020-02807-9.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grodniewicz, J. P. 2022a. “Effective Filtering: Language Comprehension and Testimonial Entitlement.” The Philosophical Quarterly, https://doi.org/10.1093/pq/pqac064.
   Google Scholar
• Grodniewicz, J. P. 2022b. “The Justification of Comprehension-Based Beliefs.” Review of Philosophy and Psychology 13 (1): 109–126. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13164-021-00575-0.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hasson, U., J. P. Simmons, and A. Todorov. 2005. “Believe It or Not.” Psychological Science 16 (7): 566–571. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0956-7976.2005.01576.x.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heck, R. 1995. “The Sense of Communication.” Mind 104 (413): 79–106. https://doi.org/10.1093/mind/104.413.79.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hermes, J., T. Behne, and H. Rakoczy. 2018. “The Development of Selective Trust: Prospects for a Dual-Process Account.” Child Development Perspectives 12 (2): 134–138. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdep.12274.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hunter, D. 1998. “Understanding and Belief.” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 58 (3): 559. https://doi.org/10.2307/2653756.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Isberner, M.-B., and T. Richter. 2013. “Can Readers Ignore Implausibility? Evidence for Nonstrategic Monitoring of Event-Based Plausibility in Language Comprehension.” Acta Psychologica 142 (1): 15–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2012.10.003.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Isberner, M.-B., and T. Richter. 2014. “Comprehension and Validation: Separable Stages of Information Processing? A Case for Epistemic Monitoring in Language Comprehension.” In Processing Inaccurate Information: Theoretical and Applied Perspectives from Cognitive Science and the Educational Sciences, edited by David N. Rapp and Jason L.G. Braasch, 245–276. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Jary, M. 2010. Assertion. Palgrave Macmillan UK. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230274617.
   Google Scholar
• Johnson-Laird, P. N. 1983. Mental Models: Towards a Cognitive Science of Language, Inference, and Consciousness. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Johnson, M. K., J. D. Bransford, and S. K. Solomon. 1973. “Memory for Tacit Implications of Sentences.” Journal of Experimental Psychology 98 (1): 203–205. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0034290.
   Google Scholar
• Johnson, M. K., S. Hashtroudi, and D. S. Lindsay. 1993. “Source Monitoring.” Psychological Bulletin 114 (1): 3–28. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.114.1.3.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kendeou, P. 2014. “Validation and Comprehension: An Integrated Overview.” Discourse Processes 51 (1-2): 189–200. https://doi.org/10.1080/0163853X.2013.855874.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kintsch, W. 1988. “The Role of Knowledge in Discourse Comprehension: A Construction-Integration Model.” Psychological Review 95 (2): 163–182. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.95.2.163.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kintsch, W., and T. A. van Dijk. 1978. “Toward a Model of Text Comprehension and Production.” Psychological Review 85 (5): 363–394. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.85.5.363.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kissine, M., and O. Klein. 2013. “Models of Communication, Epistemic Trust and Espistemic Vigilance.” In Social Cognition and Communication, edited by J. P. Forgas, O. Vincze, and J. László, 139–154. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203744628.
   Google Scholar
• Long, D. L., and E. M. Freed. 2018. “A Memory Retrieval View of Text Comprehension.” In Deep Comprehension. 1st ed., edited by K. Millis, D. L. Long, J. P. Magliano, and K. Wiemer, 27–40. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315109503-4
   Google Scholar
• Longworth, G. 2008. “Comprehending Speech.” Philosophical Perspectives 22 (1): 339–373. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1520-8583.2008.00151.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Longworth, G. 2018. “Understanding What was Said.” Synthese 195 (2): 815–834. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-016-1243-5.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mandelbaum, E. 2014. “Thinking is Believing.” Inquiry 57 (1): 55–96. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020174X.2014.858417.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mandelbaum, E., J. Quilty-Dunn, and The Harvard Review of Philosophy. 2015. “Believing without Reason: Or: Why Liberals Shouldn’t Watch Fox News.” The Harvard Review of Philosophy 22: 42–52. https://doi.org/10.5840/harvardreview2015226.
   Google Scholar
• Marsh, E. J., A. D. Cantor, and N. M. Brashier. 2016. “Believing That Humans Swallow Spiders in Their Sleep: False Beliefs as Side Effects of the Processes that Support Accurate Knowledge.” In Psychology of Learning and Motivation, Vol. 64, edited by B. H. Ross, 93–132. https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.plm.2015.09.003
   Google Scholar
• McNamara, D. S., and J. Magliano. 2009. “Psychology of Learning and Motivation.” In Psychology of Learning and Motivation 51: 297–384. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0079-7421(09)51009-2.
   Google Scholar
• Mercier, H. 2017. “How Gullible are We? A Review of the Evidence from Psychology and Social Science.” Review of General Psychology 21 (2): 103–122. https://doi.org/10.1037/gpr0000111.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Michaelian, K. 2010. “In Defence of Gullibility: The Epistemology of Testimony and the Psychology of Deception Detection.” Synthese 176 (3): 399–427. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-009-9573-1.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Michaelian, K. 2013. “The Evolution of Testimony: Receiver Vigilance, Speaker Honesty and the Reliability of Communication.” Episteme 10 (1): 37–59. https://doi.org/10.1017/epi.2013.2.
   Google Scholar
• Millikan, Ruth G. 2004. Varieties of Meaning: The 2002 Jean Nicod Lectures. Cambridge, Massachusetts : MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Millikan, Ruth G. 2005. Language: A Biological Model. Oxford: Oxford; New York: Clarendon Press; Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Nadarevic, L., and E. Erdfelder. 2013. “Spinoza’s Error: Memory for Truth and Falsity.” Memory & Cognition 41 (2): 176–186. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-012-0251-z.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• O’Brien, E. J., and A. E. Cook. 2016. “Separating the Activation, Integration, and Validation Components of Reading.” In Psychology of Learning and Motivation, Vol. 65, edited by B. Ross, 249–276. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Elsevier.
   Google Scholar
• Peet, A. 2018. “Testimonial Knowledge without Knowledge of What is Said.” Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 99 (1): 65–81. https://doi.org/10.1111/papq.12137.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Piest, B. A., M.-B. Isberner, and T. Richter. 2018. “Don’t Believe Everything you Hear: Routine Validation of Audiovisual Information in Children and Adults.” Memory & Cognition 46 (6): 849–863. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-018-0807-7.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Polka, L., and T. Nazzi. 2018. “Interacting Processes and Developmental Biases Allow Learners to Crack the “What” Code and the “who” Code in Spoken Language.” Applied Psycholinguistics 39 (4): 757–761. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716418000218.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Potts, G. R. 1972. “Information Processing Strategies Used in the Encoding of Linear Orderings.” Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 11 (6): 727–740. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5371(72)80007-0.
   Google Scholar
• Recanati, F. 2002. “Does Linguistic Communication Rest on Inference?” Mind & Language 17 (1 & 2): 105–126. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-0017.00191.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Richter, T. 2015. “Validation and Comprehension of Text Information: Two Sides of the Same Coin.” Discourse Processes 52 (5-6): 337–355. https://doi.org/10.1080/0163853X.2015.1025665.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Richter, T., S. Schroeder, and B. Wöhrmann. 2009. “You Don’t Have to Believe Everything you Read: Background Knowledge Permits Fast and Efficient Validation of Information.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 96 (3): 538–558. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0014038.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Richter, T., and M. Singer. 2018. “Discourse Updating: Acquiring and Revising Knowledge through Discourse.” In The Routledge Handbook of Discourse Processes, edited by M. F. Schober, D. N. Rapp, and M. A. Britt, 167–190. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Schroeder, S., T. Richter, and I. Hoever. 2008. “Getting a Picture that is Both Accurate and Stable: Situation Models and Epistemic Validation.” Journal of Memory and Language 59 (3): 237–255. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2008.05.001.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shieber, J. 2012. “Against Credibility.” Australasian Journal of Philosophy 90 (1): 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/00048402.2011.560953.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shieber, J. 2015. Testimony: A Philosophical Introduction. New York: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group.
   Google Scholar
• Singer, M. 2006. “Verification of Text Ideas During Reading.” Journal of Memory and Language 54 (4): 574–591. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2005.11.003.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Singer, M. 2013. “Validation in Reading Comprehension.” Current Directions in Psychological Science 22 (5): 361–366. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721413495236.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Singer, M. 2017. “Memory for Text and Discourse: Retrieval and Comprehension.” In Learning and Memory: A Comprehensive Reference, 357–381. Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-809324-5.21065-1
   Google Scholar
• Singer, M. 2019. “Challenges in Processes of Validation and Comprehension.” Discourse Processes 56 (5-6): 465–483. https://doi.org/10.1080/0163853X.2019.1598167.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sparks, J. R., and D. N. Rapp. 2011. “Readers' Reliance on Source Credibility in the Service of Comprehension.” Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 37 (1): 230–247. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0021331.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sperber, D. 1997. “Intuitive and Reflective Beliefs.” Mind and Language 12 (1): 67–83. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-0017.00036.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sperber, D. 2000. “Introduction.” In Metarepresentations: A Multidisciplinary Perspective, edited by D. Sperber, 3–13. New York: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Sperber, D. 2013. “Speakers Are Honest Because Hearers Are Vigilant Reply to Kourken Michaelian.” Episteme 10 (1): 61–71. https://doi.org/10.1017/epi.2013.7.
   Google Scholar
• Sperber, D., F. Clément, C. Heintz, O. Mascaro, H. Mercier, G. Origgi, and D. Wilson. 2010. “Epistemic Vigilance.” Mind & Language 25 (4): 359–393. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0017.2010.01394.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Street, C. N. H., and D. C. Richardson. 2015. “Descartes versus Spinoza: Truth, Uncertainty, and Bias.” Social Cognition 33 (3): 227–239. https://doi.org/10.1521/soco.2015.33.2.2.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thagard, P. 2005. “Testimony, Credibility, and Explanatory Coherence.” Erkenntnis 63 (3): 295–316. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10670-005-4004-2.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van Dijk, T. A., and W. Kintsch. 1983. Strategies of Discourse Comprehension. New York: Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Weil, R., Y. Schul, and R. Mayo. 2020. “Correction of Evident Falsehood Requires Explicit Negation.” Journal of Experimental Psychology: General. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0000635.
   Google Scholar
• Wyer, R. S., and G. A. Radvansky. 1999. “The Comprehension and Validation of Social Information.” Psychological Review 106 (1): 89–118. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.106.1.89.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zwaan, R. A. 2016. “Situation Models, Mental Simulations, and Abstract Concepts in Discourse Comprehension.” Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 23 (4): 1028–1034. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-015-0864-x.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zwaan, R. A., M. C. Langston, and A. C. Graesser. 1995. “The Construction of Situation Models in Narrative Comprehension: An Event-Indexing Model.” Psychological Science 6 (5): 292–297. Retrieved from JSTOR. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.1995.tb00513.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zwaan, R. A., and G. A. Radvansky. 1998. “Situation Models in Language Comprehension and Memory.” Psychological Bulletin 123 (2): 162–185. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.123.2.162.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar