Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-cfpbc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-20T12:14:13.900Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

One alignment mechanism or many?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 April 2004

Arthur B. Markman ,
Kyungil Kim ,
Levi B. Larkey ,
Lisa Narvaez  and
C. Hunt Stilwell
Arthur B. Markman*
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, University of Texas, 1 University Station, A8000, Austin, TX78712http://www.psy.utexas.edu/psy/FACULTY/Markman/index.html
Kyungil Kim*
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, University of Texas, 1 University Station, A8000, Austin, TX78712http://www.psy.utexas.edu/psy/FACULTY/Markman/index.html
Levi B. Larkey*
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, University of Texas, 1 University Station, A8000, Austin, TX78712http://www.psy.utexas.edu/psy/FACULTY/Markman/index.html
Lisa Narvaez*
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, University of Texas, 1 University Station, A8000, Austin, TX78712http://www.psy.utexas.edu/psy/FACULTY/Markman/index.html
C. Hunt Stilwell*
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, University of Texas, 1 University Station, A8000, Austin, TX78712http://www.psy.utexas.edu/psy/FACULTY/Markman/index.html
*
markman@psy.utexas.edu
kyungil@mail.utexas.edu
larkey@mail.utexas.edu
grimmlr@mail.utexas.edu
stilwell@psy.utexas.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Pickering & Garrod (P&G) suggest that communicators synchronize their processing at a number of linguistic levels. Whereas their explanation suggests that representations are being compared across individuals, there must be some representation of all conversation participants in each participant's head. At the level of the situation model, it is important to maintain separate representations for each participant. At other levels, it seems less crucial to have a separate representation for each participant. This analysis suggests that different mechanisms may synchronize representations at different linguistic levels.

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 27 , Issue 2 , April 2004 , pp. 204 - 205
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2004

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)