When one speaker’s broccoli is another speaker’s cauliflower: the real-time processing of multiple speaker vocabularies

References

• Allopenna, P. D., Magnuson, J. S., & Tanenhaus, M. K. (1998). Tracking the time course of spoken word recognition using eye movements: Evidence for continuous mapping models. Journal of Memory and Language, 38(4), 419–439. https://doi.org/10.1006/jmla.1997.2558
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Altmann, G. T. M., & Kamide, Y. (2007). The real-time mediation of visual attention by language and world knowledge: Linking anticipatory (and other) eye movements to linguistic processing. Journal of Memory and Language, 57(4), 502–518. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2006.12.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anderson, S. E., Chiu, E., Huette, S., & Spivey, M. J. (2011). On the temporal dynamics of language-mediated vision and vision-mediated language. Acta Psychologica, 137(2), 181–189. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2010.09.008
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Babel, M., & Russell, J. (2015). Expectations and speech intelligibility. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 137(5), 2823–2833. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.4919317
   PubMed 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(1), 404–413. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0031813
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barr, D. J., & Keysar, B. (2002). Anchoring comprehension in linguistic precedents. Journal of Memory and Language, 46(2), 391–418. https://doi.org/10.1006/jmla.2001.2815
   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(3), 255–278. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2012.11.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bates, D., Kliegl, R., Vasishth, S., & Baayen, H. (2015). Parsimonious Mixed Models. ArXiv150604967 Stat. Available online at: http://arxiv.org/abs/1506.04967.
   Google Scholar
• Bates, D., Maechler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S. (2015). Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software, 67(1), 1–48. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v067.i01
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Betts, H. N., Gilbert, R. A., Cai, Z. G., Okedara, Z. B., & Rodd, J. M. (2018). Retuning of lexical-semantic representations: Repetition and spacing effects in word-meaning priming. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 44(7), 1130–1150. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/xlm0000507
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bortfeld, H., & Brennan, S. E. (1997). Use and acquisition of idiomatic expressions by native and non-native speakers. Discourse Processes, 23(2), 119–147. https://doi.org/10.1080/01638537709544986
   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(6), 1482–1493. https://doi.org/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(2), 261–273. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1756-8765.2009.01019.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brodeur, M. B., Dionne-Dostie, E., Montreuil, T., & Lepage, M. (2010). The Bank of Standardized Stimuli (BOSS), a new set of 480 normative photos of objects to be used as visual stimuli in cognitive research. PLoS ONE, 5(5), e10773. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0106953
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brown-Schmidt, S. (2009). Partner-specific interpretation of maintained referential precedents during interactive dialog. Journal of Memory and Language, 61(2), 171–190. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2009.04.003
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brown-Schmidt, S., & Hanna, J. E. (2011). Talking in another person’s shoes: Incremental perspective-taking in language processing. Dialogue and Discourse, 2(1), 11–33. https://doi.org/10.5087/dad.2011.102
   Google Scholar
• Cai, Z. G., Gilbert, R. A., Davis, M. H., Gaskell, M. G., Farrar, L., Adler, S., & Rodd, J. M. (2017). Accent modulates access to word meaning: Evidence for a speaker-model account of spoken word recognition. Cognitive Psychology, 98, 73–101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogpsych.2017.08.003
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chaves, R. P., & Dery, J. E. (2019). Frequency effects in subject islands. Journal of Linguistics, 55(3), 475–521. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022226718000294
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clarke, C. M., & Garrett, M. F. (2004). Rapid adaptation to foreign-accented English. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 116(6), 3647–3658. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.1815131
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cooper, R. M. (1974). The control of eye fixation by the meaning of spoken language: A new methodology for the real-time investigation of speech perception, memory, and language processing. Cognitive Psychology, 6(1), 84–107. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0285(74)90005-X
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Creel, S. C., Aslin, R. N., & Tanenhaus, M. K. (2008). Heeding the voice of experience: The role of talker variation in lexical access. Cognition, 106(2), 633–664. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2007.03.013
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Crystal, D. (2006). English worldwide. In R. M. Hogg, & D. Denison (Eds.), A history of the English language (pp. 420–439). Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Dahan, D., Drucker, S. J., & Scarborough, R. A. (2008). Talker adaptation in speech perception: Adjusting the signal or representations? Cognition, 108(3), 710–718. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2008.06.003
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dahan, D., Magnuson, J. S., Tanenhaus, M. K., & Hogan, E. M. (2001). Subcategorization mismatches and the time course of lexical access: Evidence for lexical competition. Language and Cognitive Processes, 16(5-6), 507–534. https://doi.org/10.1080/01690960143000074
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dahan, D., & Tanenhaus, M. K. (2005). Looking at the rope when looking for the snake: Conceptually mediated eye movements during spoken-word recognition. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 12, 453–459. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193787
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dautriche, I., Swingley, D., & Christophe, A. (2015). Learning novel phonological neighbors: Syntactic category matters. Cognition, 143, 77–86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2015.06.003
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dink, J. W., & Ferguson, B. (2015). eyetrackingR: An R library for eye-tracking data analysis. www.eyetracking-r.com.
   Google Scholar
• Ferguson, H. J., Apperly, I., Ahmad, J., Bindemann, M., & Cane, J. (2015). Task constraints distinguish perspective inferences from perspective use during discourse interpretation in a false belief task. Cognition, 139, 50–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2015.02.010
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fraundorf, S. H., & Jaeger, T. F. (2016). Readers generalize adaptation to newly-encountered dialectal structures to other unfamiliar structures. Journal of Memory and Language, 91, 28–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2016.05.006
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Garrod, S., & Anderson, A. (1987). Saying what you mean in dialogue: A study in conceptual and semantic co-ordination. Cognition, 27(2), 181–218. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(87)90018-7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gegg-Harrison, W. M., & Tanenhaus, M. K. (2016). What’s in a name? Interlocutors dynamically update expectations about shared names. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, Article 212. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00212
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goldinger, S. D. (1998). Echoes of echoes? An episodic theory of lexical access. Psychological Review, 105(2), 1–67. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.105.2.251
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Görges, F., Oppermann, F., Jescheniak, J. D., & Schriefers, H. (2013). Activation of phonological competitors in visual search. Acta Psychologica, 143(2), 168–175. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2013.03.006
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Graham, S. A., Sedivy, J., & Khu, M. (2014). That’s not what you said earlier: Preschoolers expect partners to be referentially consistent. Journal of Child Language, 41(1), 34–50. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0305000912000530
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hahn, N., Snedeker, J., & Rabagliati, H. (2015). Rapid linguistic ambiguity resolution in young children with autism spectrum disorder: Eye tracking evidence for the limits of weak central coherence. Autism Research, 8(6), 717–726. https://doi.org/10.1002/aur.1487
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hanna, J. E., Tanenhaus, M. K., & Trueswell, J. C. (2003). The effects of common ground and perspective on domains of referential interpretation. Journal of Memory and Language, 49(1), 43–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0749-596X(03)00022-6
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hanulíková, A., van Alphen, P. M., van Goch, M. M., & Weber, A. (2012). When one person’s mistake is another’s standard usage: The effect of foreign accent on syntactic processing. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 24(4), 878–887. https://doi.org/10.1162/jocn_a_00103
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hay, J., Warren, P., & Drager, K. (2006). Factors influencing speech perception in the context of a merger-in-progress. Journal of Phonetics, 34, 458–484. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wocn.2005.10.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Horton, W. S., & Brennan, S. E. (2016). The role of metarepresentation in the production and resolution of referring expressions. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, Article 1111. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01111
   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. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-011-0135-7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huettig, F., & Altmann, G. T. M. (2005). Word meaning and the control of eye fixation: Semantic competitor effects and the visual world paradigm. Cognition, 96(1), B23–B32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2004.10.003
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huettig, F., & McQueen, J. M. (2007). The tug of war between phonological, semantic and shape information in language-mediated visual search. Journal of Memory and Language, 57(4), 460–482. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2007.02.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huettig, F., Olivers, C. N. L., & Hartsuiker, R. J. (2011). Looking, language, and memory: Bridging research from the visual world and visual search paradigms. Acta Psychologica, 137(2), 138–150. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2010.07.013
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ibarra, A., & Tanenhaus, M. K. (2016). The flexibility of conceptual pacts: Referring expressions dynamically shift to accommodate new conceptualizations. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, Article 561. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00561
   PubMed 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(1), 26–37. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.116.1.26
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kapnoula, E. C., & McMurray, B. (2016). Newly learned word forms are abstract and integrated immediately after acquisition. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 23(2), 491–499. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-015-0897-1
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kapnoula, E. C., Packard, S., Gupta, P., & McMurray, B. (2015). Immediate lexical integration of novel word forms. Cognition, 134, 85–89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2014.09.007
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Keysar, B., Barr, D. J., Balin, J. A., & Brauner, J. S. (2000). Taking perspective in conversation: The role of mutual knowledge in comprehension. Psychological Science, 11(1), 32–38. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9280.00211
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kieslich, P. J., & Henninger, F. (2017). Mousetrap: An integrated, open-sourced mouse-tracking package. Behavior Research Methods, 49(5), 1652–1667. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-017-0900-z
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Knoeferle, P., & Crocker, M. W. (2006). The coordinated interplay of scene, utterance, and world knowledge: Evidence from eye-tracking. Cognitive Science, 30(3), 481–529. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog0000_65
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kraljic, T., Samuel, A. G., & Brennan, S. E. (2008). First impressions and last resorts: How listeners adjust to speaker variability. Psychological Science, 19(4), 332–338. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02090.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kronmüller, E., & Barr, D. J. (2007). Perspective-free pragmatics: Broken precedents and the recovery-from-preemption hypothesis. Journal of Memory and Language, 56(3), 436–455. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2006.05.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kronmüller, E., & Barr, D. J. (2015). Referential precedents in spoken language comprehension: A review and meta-analysis. Journal of Memory and Language, 83, 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2015.03.008
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kronmüller, E., & Guerra, E. (2020). Processing speaker-specific information in two stages during the interpretation of referential precendents. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, Article 552368. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.552368
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kuznetsova, A., Brockhoff, P. B., & Christensen, R. H. B. (2017). Lmertest package: Tests in linear mixed effects models. Journal of Statistical Software, 82(13), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v082.i13
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Labov, W. (2001). Principles of linguisic change, volume 2: Social factors. Wiley-Blackwell.
   Google Scholar
• Lev-Ari, S. (2015). Comprehending non-native speakers: Theory and evidence for adjustment in manner of processing. Frontiers in Psychology, 5, Article 1546. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01546
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lev-Ari, S., Ho, E., & Keysar, B. (2018). The unforeseen consequences of interacting with non-native speakers. Topics in Cognitive Science, 10(4), 835–849. https://doi.org/10.1111/tops.12325
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lev-Ari, S., & Keysar, B. (2012). Less-detailed representation of non-native language: Why non-native speakers’ stories seem more vague. Discourse Processes, 49(7), 523–538. https://doi.org/10.1080/0163853X.2012.698493
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maris, E., & Oostenveld, R. (2007). Nonparametric statistical testing of EEG- and MEG-data. Journal of Neuroscience Methods, 164(1), 177–190. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jneumeth.2007.03.024
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martin, C. D., Garcia, X., Potter, D., Melinger, A., & Costa, A. (2016). Holiday or vacation? The processing of variation in vocabulary across dialects. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 31(3), 375–390. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jneumeth.2007.03.024
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mathôt, S., Schreij, D., & Theeuwes, J. (2012). Opensesame: An open-source, graphical experiment builder for the social sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 44(2), 314–324. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-011-0168-7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Matthews, D., Lieven, E., & Tomasello, M. (2010). What’s in a manner of speaking? Children’s sensitivity to partner-specific referential precedents. Developmental Psychology, 46(4), 749–760. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0019657
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McGowan, K. B. (2015). Social expectation improves speech perception in noise. Language and Speech, 58(4), 502–521. https://doi.org/10.1177/0023830914565191
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McQueen, J. M., & Huettig, F. (2014). Interference of spoken word recognition through phonological priming from visual objects and printed words. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 76(1), 190–200. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-013-0560-8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mervis, C. B. (1987). Child-basic object categories and early lexical development. In U. Neisser (Ed.), Concepts and conceptual development: Ecological and intellectual factors in categorization (pp. 201–233). Cambridge University Press.
   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(2), 201–213. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0749-596X(03)00028-7
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nederhouser, M., & Spivey, M. J. (2004). Eye-tracking and simulating the temporal dynamics of categorization. In K. Forbus, D. Gentner, & T. Reiger (Eds.), Proceedings of the 26th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society (p. 1612). Erlbaum. https://escholarship.org/uc/item/6d9579kh
   Google Scholar
• Ostashchenko, E., Deliens, G., Geelhand, P., Bertels, J., & Kissine, M. (2019). Referential processing in 3- and 5-year-old children is egocentrically anchored. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 45(8), 1387–1397. https://doi.org/10.1037/xlm0000659
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Porretta, V., Tucker, B. V., & Järvikivi, J. (2016). The influence of gradient foreign accentedness and listener experience on word recognition. Journal of Phonetics, 58, 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wocn.2016.05.006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• R Core Team. (2019). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. https://www.R-project.org/.
   Google Scholar
• Shintel, H., & Keysar, B. (2007). You said it before and you’ll say it again: Expectations of consistency in communication. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 33(2), 357–369. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.33.2.357
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Spivey, M. J., Grosjean, M., & Knoblich, G. (2005). Continuous attraction toward phonological competitors. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 102(29), 10393–10398. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.33.2.357
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• St. Pierre, T., & Johnson, E. K. (2021). Looking for wugs in all the right places: Children’s use of prepositions in word learning. Cognitive Science, 45(8), e13028. https://doi.org/10.1111/cogs.13028
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tanenhaus, M. K., Spivey-Knowlton, M. J., Eberhard, K. M., & Sedivy, J. C. (1995). Integration of visual and linguistic information in spoken language comprehension. Science, 268(5217), 1632–1634. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.7777863
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tobar-Henríquez, A., Rabagliati, H., & Branigan, H. P. (2021). Speakers extrapolate community-level knowledge from individual linguistic encounters. Cognition, 210, 104602. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2021.104602
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van Berkum, J. J. A., van den Brink, D., Tesink, C. M. J.Y., Kos, M., & Hagoort, P. (2008). The neural integration of speaker and message. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 20(4), 580–591. https://doi.org/10.1162/jocn.2008.20054
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walker, A., & Hay, J. (2011). Congruence between ‘word age’ and ‘voice age’ facilitates lexical access. Laboratory Phonology, 2(1), 219–237. https://doi.org/10.1515/labphon.2011.007
   Google Scholar
• Yildirim, I., Degen, J., Tanenhaus, M. K., & Jaeger, T. F. (2016). Talker-specificity and adaptation in quantifier interpretation. Journal of Memory and Language, 87, 128–143. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2015.08.003
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yoon, S. O., & Brown-Schmidt, S. (2018). Influence of the historical discourse record on language processing in dialogue. Discourse Processes, 55(1), 31–46. https://doi.org/10.1080/0163853X.2016.1193429
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar