Spoilt for choice: initially considering several referential expressions affects subsequent referential decisions

References

• Agresti, A. (2002). Categorical data analysis (2nd ed.). New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.
   Google Scholar
• Anderson, J. R., & Reder, L. M. (1999). The fan effect: New results and new theories. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 128, 186–197. doi: 10.1037/0096-3445.128.2.186
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bangerter, A., & Clark, H. H. (2003). Navigating joint projects with dialogue. Cognitive Science, 27, 195–225. doi: 10.1207/s15516709cog2702_3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bangerter, A., Clark, H. H., & Katz, A. R. (2004). Navigating joint projects in telephone conversations. Discourse Processes, 37, 1–23. doi: 10.1207/s15326950dp3701_1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barr, D. J., Jackson, L., & Phillips, I. (2014). Using a voice to put a name to a face: The psycholinguistics of proper name comprehension. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 143, 404–413. doi: 10.1037/a0031813
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barr, D. J., Levy, R., Scheepers, C., & Tily, H. J. (2013). Random effects structure for confirmatory hypothesis testing: Keep it maximal. Journal of Memory and Language, 68, 255–278. doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2012.11.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brennan, S. E., & Clark, H. H. (1996). Conceptual pacts and lexical choice in conversation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 22, 1482–1493. doi: 10.1037/0278-7393.22.6.1482
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brennan, S. E., & Hanna, J. E. (2009). Partner-specific adaptation in dialog. Topics in Cognitive Science, 1, 274–291. doi: 10.1111/j.1756-8765.2009.01019.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brennan, S. E., & Ohaeri, J. O. (1999). Why do electronic conversations seem less polite? The costs and benefits of hedging. In Proceedings of the international joint conference on work activities coordination and collaboration (pp. 227–235). New York, NY: ACM. doi: 10.1145/295665.295942
   Google Scholar
• Brown-Schmidt, S. (2009). Partner-specific interpretation of maintained referential precedents during interactive dialog. Journal of Memory and Language, 61, 171–190. doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2009.04.003
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brown-Schmidt, S. (2012). Beyond common and privileged: Gradient representations of common ground in real-time language use. Language and Cognitive Processes, 27, 62–89. doi: 10.1080/01690965.2010.543363
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bunting, M. F., Conway, A. R. A., & Heitz, R. P. (2004). Individual differences in the fan effect and working memory capacity. Journal of Memory and Language, 51, 604–622. doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2004.07.007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clark, H. H. (1992). Arenas of language use. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Clark, H. H. (1996). Using language. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Clark, H. H., & Bangerter, A. (2004). Changing conceptions of reference. In I. Noveck & D. Sperber (Eds.), Experimental pragmatics (pp. 25–49). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Clark, H. H., & Brennan, S. E. (1991). Grounding in communication. In L. B. Resnick, J. M. Levine, & S. D. Teasley (Eds.), Perspectives on socially shared cognition (pp. 127–149). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
   Google Scholar
• Clark, H. H., & Krych, M. A. (2004). Speaking while monitoring addressees for understanding. Journal of Memory and Language, 50, 62–81. doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2003.08.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clark, H. H., & Marshall, C. (1981). Definite reference and mutual knowledge. In A. K. Joshi, B. L. Webber, & I. A. Sag (Eds.), Elements of discourse understanding (Vol. 2, pp. 10–63). Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Clark, H. H., & Schaefer, E. F. (1989). Contributing to discourse. Cognitive Science, 13, 259–294. doi: 10.1207/s15516709cog1302_7
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clark, H. H., & Wilkes-Gibbs, D. (1986). Referring as a collaborative process. Cognition, 22, 1–39. doi: 10.1016/0010-0277(86)90010-7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Duff, M. C., Hengst, J., Tranel, D., & Cohen, N. J. (2006). Development of shared information in communication despite hippocampal amnesia. Nature Neuroscience, 9, 140–146. doi: 10.1038/nn1601
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fox Tree, J. E. (2010). Discourse markers across speakers and settings. Language and Linguistics Compass, 3, 1–13. doi: 10.1111/j.1749-818X.2010.00195.x
   Google Scholar
• Gorman, K. S., Gegg-Harrison, W., Marsh, C. R., & Tanenhaus, M. K. (2013). What’s learned together stays together: Speakers’ choice of referring expression reflects shared experience. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 39, 843–853. doi: 10.1037/a0029467
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Horton, W. S. (2007). The influence of partner-specific memory associations on language production: Evidence from picture naming. Language and Cognitive Processes, 22, 1114–1139. doi: 10.1080/01690960701402933
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Horton, W. S. (2008). A memory-based approach to common ground and audience design. In I. Kecskes (Ed.), Intention, common ground, and the egocentric speaker-hearer (pp. 189–222). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
   Google Scholar
• Horton, W. S., & Gerrig, R. J. (2005a). Conversational common ground and memory processes in language production. Discourse Processes, 40, 1–35. doi: 10.1207/s15326950dp4001_1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Horton, W. S., & Gerrig, R. J. (2005b). The impact of memory demands on audience design during language production. Cognition, 96, 127–142. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2004.07.001
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Horton, W. S., & Gerrig, R. J. (2016). Revisiting the memory-based processing approach to common ground. Topics in Cognitive Science, 8, 780–795. doi: 10.1111/tops.12216
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Horton, W. S., & Slaten, D. G. (2012). Anticipating who will say what: The influence of speaker-specific memory associations on reference resolution. Memory & Cognition, 40, 113–126. doi: 10.3758/s13421-011-0135-7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hupet, M., & Chantraine, Y. (1992). Changes in repeated references: Collaboration or repetition effects? Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 21, 485–496. doi: 10.1007/BF01067526
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hupet, M., Chantraine, Y., & Nef, F. (1993). References in conversation between young and old normal adults. Psychology and Aging, 8, 339–346. doi: 10.1037/0882-7974.8.3.339
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hupet, M., Seron, X., & Chantraine, Y. (1991). The effects of the codability and discriminability of the referents on the collaborative referring procedure. British Journal of Psychology, 82, 449–462. doi: 10.1111/j.2044-8295.1991.tb02412.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Isaacs, E. A., & Clark, H. H. (1987). References in conversation between experts and novices. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 116, 26–37. doi: 10.1037/0096-3445.116.1.26
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jaeger, T. F. (2008). Categorical data analysis: Away from ANOVAs (transformation or not) and towards logit mixed models. Journal of Memory and Language, 59, 434–446. doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2007.11.007
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Keselman, H. J., Algina, J., Kowalchuk, R. K., & Wolfinger, R. D. (1999). The analysis of repeated measurements: A comparison of mixed-model satterthwaite F tests and a nonpooled adjusted degrees of freedom multivariate test. Communications in Statistics - Theory and Methods, 28, 2967–2999. doi: 10.1080/03610929908832460
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kiernan, K., Tao, J., & Gibbs, P. (2012). Tips and strategies for mixed modelling with SAS/STAT procedures. Presented at the 2012 SAS Global Forum, Orlando, FL.
   Google Scholar
• Knutsen, D., & Le Bigot, L. (2014). Capturing egocentric biases in reference reuse during collaborative dialogue. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 21, 1590–1599. doi: 10.3758/s13423-014-0620-7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Knutsen, D., & Le Bigot, L. (2016). Conceptual match as a determinant of reference reuse in dialogue. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition. doi: 10.1037/xlm0000313
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Knutsen, D., Ros, C., & Le Bigot, L. (2016). Generating references in naturalistic face-to-face and phone-mediated dialog settings. Topics in Cognitive Science, 8, 796–818. doi: 10.1111/tops.12218
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liu, K., & Fox Tree, J. E. (2012). Hedges enhance memory but inhibit retelling. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 19, 892–898. doi: 10.3758/s13423-012-0275-1
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• MacLeod, C. M. (2011). I said, you said: The production effect gets personal. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 18, 1197–1202. doi: 10.3758/s13423-011-0168-8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McInnes, F., & Attwater, D. (2004). Turn-taking and grounding in spoken telephone number transfers. Speech Communication, 43, 205–223. doi: 10.1016/j.specom.2004.04.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Metzing, C., & Brennan, S. E. (2003). When conceptual pacts are broken: Partner-specific effects on the comprehension of referring expressions. Journal of Memory and Language, 49, 201–213. doi: 10.1016/S0749-596X(03)00028-7
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mills, G. J. (2014). Dialogue in joint activity: Complementarity, convergence and conventionalization. New Ideas in Psychology, 32, 158–173. doi: 10.1016/j.newideapsych.2013.03.006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pickering, M. J., & Garrod, S. (2004). Toward a mechanistic psychology of dialogue. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 27, 169–190. doi: 10.1017/S0140525X04000056
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Radvansky, G. A., & Zacks, R. T. (1991). Mental models and the fan effect. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 17, 940–953. doi: 10.1037/0278-7393.17.5.940
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ratcliff, R. (1978). A theory of memory retrieval. Psychological Review, 85, 59–108. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.85.2.59
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rogers, S. L., Fay, N., & Kendal, R. L. (2016). Stick or switch: A selection heuristic predicts when people take the perspective of others or communicate egocentrically. PLOS ONE, 11, e0159570. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0159570
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rossnagel, C. (2000). Cognitive load and perspective-taking: Applying the automatic-controlled distinction to verbal communication. European Journal of Social Psychology, 30, 429–445. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1099-0992(200005/06)30:3<429::AID-EJSP3>3.0.CO;2-V
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Satterthwaite, F. E. (1946). An approximate distribution of estimates of variance components. Biometrics Bulletin, 2, 110–114. doi: 10.2307/3002019
   Google Scholar
• Shintel, H., & Keysar, B. (2009). Less is more: A minimalist account of joint action in communication. Topics in Cognitive Science, 1, 260–273. doi: 10.1111/j.1756-8765.2009.01018.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Slamecka, N., & Graf, P. (1978). The generation effect: Delineation of a phenomenon. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 4, 592–604. doi: 10.1037/0278-7393.4.6.592
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tolins, J., Zeamer, C., & Fox Tree, J. E. (2017). Overhearing dialogues and monologues: How does entrainment lead to more comprehensible referring expressions? Discourse Processes. doi: 10.1080/0163853X.2017.1279516
   Google Scholar
• Tylén, K., Weed, E., Wallentin, M., Roepstorff, A., & Frith, C. D. (2010). Language as a tool for interacting minds. Mind and Language, 25, 3–29. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-0017.2009.01379.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilkes-Gibbs, D., & Clark, H. H. (1992). Coordinating beliefs in conversation. Journal of Memory and Language, 31, 183–194. doi: 10.1016/0749-596X(92)90010-U
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yoon, S. O., & Brown-Schmidt, S. (2014). Adjusting conceptual pacts in three-party conversation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 40, 919–937. doi: 10.1037/a0036161
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar