1 / 24

What do listeners’ eyes reveal about communicating false beliefs?

What do listeners’ eyes reveal about communicating false beliefs?. Heather Ferguson & Richard Breheny. Theory of Mind. False belief task Adults don’t normally make mistakes BUT, increasing task demands reveals processing difficulties (e.g. Apperly et al., 2009 )

bernie
Download Presentation

What do listeners’ eyes reveal about communicating false beliefs?

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. What do listeners’ eyes reveal about communicating false beliefs? Heather Ferguson & Richard Breheny

  2. Theory of Mind • False belief task • Adults don’t normally make mistakes • BUT, increasing task demands reveals processing difficulties (e.g. Apperly et al., 2009 ) • Growing psycholinguistics literature…

  3. Theory of Mind • Interactive communication tasks: Move the top truck right Target Distractor

  4. Two accounts from psycholinguistics • Perspective-adjustment models • Strategic egocentric bias (Keysar et al., 2000) • Automatic biases at integration (Barr, 2008) • Constraint-based models • Perspective simultaneously influences incoming language (Nadig & Sedivy, 2002)

  5. Two accounts from psycholinguistics • Perspective-adjustment models • Strategic egocentric bias (Keysar et al., 2000) • Automatic biases at integration (Barr, 2008)✗ • Constraint-based models • Perspective simultaneously influences incoming language processing (Nadig & Sedivy, 2002)

  6. Visual World Paradigm

  7. Visual World Paradigm • Visual-world research: • Eye-movements around a visual scene are closely time-locked with related auditory input The woman will move the wine The woman will drink the wine

  8. False Beliefs in Communication False Belief task

  9. False Beliefs in Communication

  10. False Beliefs in Communication

  11. False Beliefs in Communication The umbrella is in box A/ B

  12. Design • 20 experimental videos (56 fillers) • 40 participants • Within-subjects Movement (no-move/ move) * Knowledge (privileged/ shared) design

  13. Design • 40 participants • 20 experimental videos (56 fillers) • Within-subjects Movement (no-move/ move) * Knowledge (privileged/ shared) design • My partner in the experiment gave me accurate descriptions of the videos, as far as their knowledge allowed ✓ 6.8 • Apart from when the screen was up, I believe that my partner was watching the same video clips as me ✓ 6.8 • I believe that my partner could not view the videos when the screen was covered ✓ 7 • I believe that my partner was a real participant ✓ 6.9

  14. Methods of Analysis • Temporal location of fixations was recorded at 20ms intervals for each condition • Probabilities of gazes to the critical Reality and Belief referents were calculated as a function of time, with log-ratio measure: log(P(Reality) / P(Alternative)) • Word onsets and offsets coded for every trial and participant

  15. Results

  16. Results • ANOVA • From “the” onset: ME Movement [all Fs > 20.4]

  17. Results • ANOVA • From [object] onset: ME Knowledge [all Fs > 12.8]

  18. Results • ANOVA • From [object] onset: Movement*Knowledge [all Fs > 4.24]

  19. Results • T-tests • From “the” onset: No Sig. Diff from 0 (no bias) [all ts < 1.15]

  20. Summary of results

  21. Fit with previous work

  22. Thank you! Arts & Humanities Research Council Napoleon Katsos (RCEAL lab) Carly Hilts Seonaid Beckwith

  23. Results • Switching rates • No Sig. differences [all Fs < 1]

  24. Results Individual participant data

More Related