Instantaneous systems of communicative conventions through virtual bargaining.
Instantaneous systems of communicative conventions through virtual bargaining.
复制标题
通过虚拟讨价还价的即时交流约定系统。
DOI：
10.1016/j.cognition.2022.105097
复制
发表时间：
2022
期刊：
影响因子：
3.4
通讯作者：
Misyak J
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Misyak J
无论是在实验中还是在日常交流中，人们都可以立即创造出新的惯例，将个人的交流信号与意义联系起来。然而，自然交流的一个基本原则是，信号的含义通常与可获得但未被选择的替代信号的含义形成对比。也就是说，交际惯例通常形成一个系统，而不是由孤立的信号-意义对组成。因此，创建一个连接特定信号和意义的新约定似乎需要创建一个连接可能信号和可能意义的约定系统，其中要传达的信号-意义对只是一个子案例。如果是这样，人们就不会把信号和意义孤立地联系起来；信号-含义配对将取决于可选的信号和含义。我们概述并解决了关于如何形成瞬时公约的理论挑战，建立在先前关于“虚拟讨价还价”的工作基础上，在“虚拟讨价还价”中，人们模拟关于选择哪种公约或公约系统的谈判过程的结果。此外，我们从经验上证明，在“最小”的实验范式中，可以灵活地创建约定的瞬时系统。158人玩一种新颖的信号游戏的实验证据表明，修改信号集和意义集确实可以系统地修改人们可能立即构建的信号-意义映射。虽然与虚拟讨价还价的说法一致，但对这些结果的解释可能对一些语用推理的说法具有挑战性。
People can instantaneously create novel conventions that link individual communicative signals to meanings, both in experiments and everyday communication. Yet a basic principle of natural communication is that the meaning of a signal typically contrasts with the meanings of alternative signals that were available but not chosen. That is, communicative conventions typically form a system, rather than consisting of isolated signal-meaning pairs. Accordingly, creating a novel convention linking a specific signal and meaning seems to require creating a system of conventions linking possible signals to possible meanings, of which the signal-meaning pair to be communicated is merely a sub-case. If so, people will not link signals and meanings in isolation; signal-meaning pairings will depend on alternative signals and meanings. We outline and address theoretical challenges concerning how instantaneous conventions can be formed, building on prior work on “virtual bargaining,” in which people simulate the results of a process of negotiation concerning which convention, or system of conventions, to choose. Moreover, we demonstrate empirically that instantaneous systems of conventions can flexibly be created in a ‘minimal’ experimental paradigm. Experimental evidence from 158 people playing a novel signaling game shows that modifying both the set of signals, and the set of meanings, can indeed systematically modify the signal-meaning mappings that people may instantaneously construct. While consistent with the virtual bargaining account, accounting for these results may be challenging for some accounts of pragmatic inference.