Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorCruz, Manuel Padillaen
dc.description.abstractNoises, similarities between words, slips of the tongue, ambiguities, wrong or false beliefs, lexical deficits, inappropriate inferences, cognitive overload, non-shared knowledge, topic organisation or focusing problems, among others, may cause misunderstanding. While some of these are structural factors, others pertain to the speaker or to both the speaker and the hearer. In addition to stable factors connected with the interlocutors′ communicative abilities, cultural knowledge or patterns of thinking, other less stable factors, such as their personal relationships, psychological states or actions motivated by physiological functions, may also result in communicative problems. This paper considers a series of further factors that may eventually lead to misunderstanding, and which solely pertain to the hearer: processing strategy, confirmation bias and weak vigilance.en
dc.publisherWydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Łódzkiegoen
dc.relation.ispartofseriesResearch in Language;15en
dc.rightsThis work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 License.en
dc.subjectprocessing strategyen
dc.subjectconfirmation biasen
dc.subjectepistemic vigilanceen
dc.subjecthermeneutical vigilanceen
dc.titleInterlocutors-Related and Hearer-Specific Causes of Misunderstanding: Processing Strategy, Confirmation Bias and Weak Vigilanceen
dc.contributor.authorAffiliationUniversity of Seville, Seville, Spainen
dc.referencesAllport, Gordon W. 1937. Personality: A Psychological Interpretation. New York: Holt & Co.en
dc.referencesArdissono, Liliana, Boella, Guido and Rossana Damiano. 1998. A plan-based model of misunderstandings in cooperative dialogue. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 48. 649-679.en
dc.referencesBachman, Lyle F. 1990. Fundamental Considerations in Language Testing. Oxford: Oxford University Press.en
dc.referencesBanks, Stephen P., Ge, Gao and Joyce Baker. 1991. Intercultural Encounters and Miscommunication. In Nikolas Coupland, Howard Giles and John M. Weimann (eds.), “Miscommunication” and Problematic Talk, 103-120. London: Sage.en
dc.referencesBardovi-Harlig, Kathleen. 2002. A New Starting Point? Investigating Formulaic Use and Input. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 24(2). 189-198. doi: doi: 10.1017/S0272263102002036en
dc.referencesBarkow, Jerome H., Cosmides, Leda and John Tooby. (eds.). 1992. The Adapted Mind. Oxford: Oxford University Press.en
dc.referencesBazzanella, Carla and Rossana Damiano. 1999. The Interactional Handling of Misunderstanding in Everyday Conversations. Journal of Pragmatics 31. 817-836. doi: doi: 10.1016/S0378-2166(98)00058-7en
dc.referencesBekkering, Harold, et al. 2009. Joint Action: Neurocognitive Mechanisms Supporting Human Interaction. Topics in Cognitive Science 1. 340-352. doi: doi: 10.1111/j.1756-8765.2009.01023.xen
dc.referencesBerger, Charles R. 2007. A Tale of Two Communication Modes: When Rational and Experiential Processing Systems Encounter Statistical and Anecdotal Depictions of Threat. Journal of Language and Social Psychology 26 (3). 215-233. doi: doi: 10.1177/0261927X06303453en
dc.referencesBialystok, Ellen. 1993. Symbolic Representation and Attentional Control in Pragmatic Competence. In Gabriele Kasper and Shoshana Blum-Kulka (eds.), Interlanguage Pragmatics, 43-59. Oxford: Oxford University Press.en
dc.referencesBlum-Kulka, Shoshana. 1992. The Metapragmatics of Politeness in Israeli Society. In Richard J. Watts, Sachiko Ide and Konrad Ehlich (eds.), Politeness in Language: Studies in Its History, Theory and Practice, 255-279. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.en
dc.referencesBlum-Kulka, Shoshana and Elda Weizman. 2003. Misunderstandings in Political Interviews. In Juliane House, Gabriele Kasper and Steven Ross (eds.), Misunderstanding in Social Life: Discourse Approaches to Problematic Talk, 127-128. London: Longman.en
dc.referencesBosco, Francesca M., Bucciarelli, Monica and Bruno G. Bara. 2006. Recognition and Repair of Communicative Failures: A Developmental Perspective. Journal of Pragmatics 38. 1398-149. doi: doi: 10.1016/j.pragma.2005.06.011en
dc.referencesBrown, Gillian. 1995. Speakers, Listeners and Communication. Explorations in Discourse Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.en
dc.referencesBrown, Penelope and Stephen C. Levinson. 1987. Politeness. Some Universals in Language Usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.en
dc.referencesCanale, Michael. 1983. From Communicative Competence To Communicative Language Pedagogy. In Jack C. Richards and Richard W. Schmidt (eds.), Language and Communication, 2-28. London: Longman.en
dc.referencesCarruthers, Peter. 2009. How We Know Our Minds: The Relationship Between Mindreading and Metacognition. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 32 (2). 121-138. doi: doi: 10.1017/S0140525X09000545.en
dc.referencesCarston, Robyn. 2002. Thoughts and Utterances. The Pragmatics of Explicit Communication. Oxford: Blackwell.en
dc.referencesCelce-Murcia, Marianne, Dornyei, Zoltan and Sarah Thurrell. 1995. Communicative Competence: A Pedagogically Motivated Model with Content Modifications. Issues in Applied Linguistics 5. 5-35.en
dc.referencesClark, Herbert H. and Meredyth A. Krych. 2004. Speaking While Monitoring Addressees for Understanding. Journal of Memory and Language 50. 62-81. doi: doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2003.08.004en
dc.referencesClément, Fabrice, Koenig, Melissa and Paul Harris. 2004. The ontogeny of trust. Mind & Language 19 (4). 360-379.en
dc.referencesCodó Olsina, Eva. 2002. Managing Understanding in Intercultural Talk: An Empirical Approach to Miscommunication. Atlantis 24 (2). 37-57.en
dc.referencesDascal, Marcelo. 1999. Introduction: Some Questions About Misunderstanding. Journal of Pragmatics 31. 753-762. doi: doi: 10.1016/S0378-2166(98)00059-9en
dc.referencesDua, Hans R. 1990. The phenomenology of miscommunication. In Stephen H. Riggins (ed.), Beyond Goffman, 113-139. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.en
dc.referencesEhrman, Madeline. 1999. Ego Boundaries and Tolerance of Ambiguity in Second Language Learning. In Jane Arnold (ed.), Affect in Language Learning, 68-86. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.en
dc.referencesEscandell Vidal, Maria V. 1998. Politeness: A Relevant Issue for Relevance Theory. Revista Alicantina de Estudios Ingleses 11. 45-57.en
dc.referencesEscandell Vidal, Maria V. 2004. Norms and Principles. Putting Social and Cognitive Pragmatics Together. In Rosina Marquez-Reiter and Maria E. Placencia (eds.), Current Trends in the Pragmatics of Spanish, 347-371. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.en
dc.referencesFerreira, Victor S., Slevc, Robert and Erin S. Rogers. 2005. How Do Speakers Avoid Ambiguous Linguistic Expressions? Cognition 96. 263-284. doi: doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2004.09.002en
dc.referencesFriedrich, James. 1993. Primary Error Detection and Minimization (PEDMIN) Strategies in Social Cognition: A Reinterpretation of Confirmation Bias Phenomena. Psychological Review 100 (2). 298-319. doi: doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.100.2.298en
dc.referencesFurnham, Adrian and Tracy Ribchester. 1995. Tolerance of Ambiguity: A Review of The Concept, its Measurement and Applications. Current Psychology 14. 179-199. doi: doi: 10.1007/BF02686907en
dc.referencesGarrod, Simon and Martin J. Pickering. 2009. Joint Action, Interactive Alignment, and Dialog. Topics in Cognitive Science 1. 292-304. doi: doi: 10.1111/j.1756-8765.2009.01020.xen
dc.referencesGass, Susan M. and Evangeline M. Varonis. 1991. Miscommunication in Nonnative Speaker Discourse. In Nikolas Coupland, Howard Giles and John M. Wiemann (eds.), “Miscommunication” and Problematic Talk, 121-145. London: Sage.en
dc.referencesGrimshaw, Allen D. 1980. Mishearings, Misunderstandings, and Other Nonsuccesses in Talk: A Plea for Redress of Speaker-Oriented Bias. Sociological Inquiry 40. 31-74. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-682X.1980.tb00016.xen
dc.referencesHartman, Ernest. 1991. Boundaries in the Mind: A New Psychology of Personality. New York: Basic Books.en
dc.referencesHays, Robert B. 1984. The Development and Maintenance of Friendship. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships 1. 75-98. doi: doi: 10.1177/0265407584011005en
dc.referencesHinnenkamp, Volker. 2003. Misunderstandings: Interactional Structure and Strategic Resources. In Juliane House, Gabriele Kasper and Steven Ross (eds.), Misunderstanding in Social Life: Discourse Approaches to Problematic Talk, 57-81. London: Sage.en
dc.referencesHouse, Juliane, Kasper, Gabriele and Steven Ross. 2003. Misunderstanding Talk. In Juliane House, Gabriele Kasper and Steven Ross (eds.), Misunderstanding in Social Life: Discourse Approaches to Problematic Talk, 1-21. London: Sage.en
dc.referencesHymes, Dell H. 1972. On Communicative Competence. In John B. Pride and Janet Holmes (eds.), Sociolinguistics. Selected Readings, 269-293. Baltimore: Penguin Books.en
dc.referencesIde, Sachiko. 1989. Formal Forms and Discernment: Two Neglected Aspects of Universals of Linguistic Politeness. Multilingua 8 (2-3). 223-248. doi: doi: 10.1515/mult.1989.8.2-3.223en
dc.referencesJanicki, Karol. 2010. Lay People’s Language Problems. International Journal of Applied Linguistics 20 (1). 73-94. doi: doi: 10.1111/j.1473-4192.2009.00229.xen
dc.referencesJucker, Andreas H., Smith, Sara W. and Tanja Ludge. 2003. Interactive Aspects of Vagueness in Conversation. Journal of Pragmatics 35. 1737-1769. doi: doi: 10.1016/S0378-2166(02)0018-1en
dc.referencesKataoka, Kuniyoshi. 1995. Affect in Japanese Women’s Letter Writing: Use of Sentence-Final Particles Ne and Yo and Orthographic Conventions. Pragmatics 5 (4). 427-453. doi: doi: 10.1075/prag.5.4.02katen
dc.referencesKecskes, Istvan. 2004. Editorial: Lexical Merging, Conceptual Blending, and Cultural Crossing. Intercultural Pragmatics 1 (1). 1-26. doi: doi: 10.1515/iprg.2004.005en
dc.referencesKecskes, Istvan. 2007. Dueling Contexts: A Dynamic Model of Meaning. Journal of Pragmatics 40. 385-406. doi: doi: 10.1016/j.pragma.2007.12.004en
dc.referencesKecskes, Istvan. 2010. The Paradox of Communication. Socio-cognitive Approach to Pragmatics. Pragmatics and Society 1 (1). 50-73. doi: doi: 10.1075/ps.1.1.04kecen
dc.referencesKecskes, Istvan and Fenghui Zhang. 2009. Activating, Seeking, and Creating Common Ground. Pragmatics & Cogniton 17 (2). 331-355. doi: doi: 10.1075/pc.17.2.06kecen
dc.referencesKeysar, Boaz. 2007. Communication and Miscommunication: the Role of Egocentric Processes. Intercultural Pragmatics 4 (4). 71-85. doi: doi: 10.1515/IP.2007.004,en
dc.referencesKeysar, Boaz and Anne S. Henly. 2002. Speakers’ Overestimation of Their Effectiveness. Psychological Science 13 (3). 207-212. doi: doi: 10.1111/1467-9280.00439en
dc.referencesKlayman, Joshua. 1995. Varieties of Confirmation Bias. In Jerome Busemeyer, Reid Hartie and Douglas L. Medin (eds.), Decision Making from a Cognitive Perspective. The Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 385-418. Vol. 32. New York: Academic Press.en
dc.referencesKunda, Ziva. 1999. Social Cognition: Making Sense of People. Boston: MIT Press.en
dc.referencesMárquez-Reiter, Rosina. 1997. Politeness Phenomena in British English and Uruguayan Spanish: The Case of Requests. Miscelánea: A Journal of English and American Studies 18. 159-167.en
dc.referencesMascaro, Olivier and Dan Sperber. 2009. The Moral, Epistemic, and Mindreading Components of Children’s Vigilance Towards Deception. Cognition 112 (3). 367-380. doi: doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2009.05.012en
dc.referencesMazzarella, Diana. 2013. ‘Optimal Relevance’ as a Pragmatic Criterion: The Role of Epistemic Vigilance. UCL Working Papers in Linguistics 25. 20-45.en
dc.referencesMazzarella, Diana. 2015. Pragmatics and Epistemic Vigilance: The Deployment of Sophisticated Interpretative Strategies. Croatian Journal of Philosophy 15 (44). 183-199.en
dc.referencesMedina, Jose. 2011. The Relevance of Credibility Excess in a Proportional View of Epistemic Injustice: Differential Epistemic Authority and the Social Imaginary. Social Epistemology: A Journal of Knowledge, Culture and Policy 25 (1). 15-35. doi: doi: 10.1080/02691728.2010.534568en
dc.referencesMercier, Hugo and Dan Sperber. 2011. Why Do Humans Reason? Arguments for an argumentative theory. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 34 (2). 57-111. doi: doi: 10.1017/S0140525X10000968en
dc.referencesMichaelian, Kourken. 2013. The evolution of testimony: Receiver vigilance, speaker honesty and the reliability of communication. Episteme 10 (1). 37-59. doi: doi: 10.1017/epi.2013.2en
dc.referencesMiller, Michael and Donald. Perlis. 1993. Presentations and this and that: Logic in action. In Martha C. Polson (ed.), Proceedings of the 15th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, 83-88. Boulder: Psychology Press.en
dc.referencesMustajoki, Arto. 2012. A speaker-oriented multidimensional approach to risks and causes of miscommunication. Language and Dialogue 2 (2). 216-246. doi: doi: 10.1075/ld.2.2.03musen
dc.referencesNickerson, Raymond S. 1998. Confirmation bias: A ubiquitous phenomenon in many guises. Review of General Psychology 2 (2). 175-220. doi: 10.1037/1089-2680.2.2.175en
dc.referencesOriggi, Gloria. 2013. Epistemic injustice and epistemic trust. Social Epistemology: A Journal of Knowledge, Culture and Policy 26 (2). 221-235. doi: doi: 10.1080/02691728.2011.652213en
dc.referencesPadilla Cruz, Manuel. 2005. Towards new politeness systems. In Juan J. Calvo Garcia de Leonardo et al. (eds.), Actas del XXVIII Congreso Internacional de AEDEAN, 385-396. Valencia: Universidad de Valencia.en
dc.referencesPadilla Cruz, Manuel. 2012. Epistemic vigilance, cautious optimism and sophisticated understanding. Research in Language 10 (4). 365-386. doi: doi: 10.2478/v10015-011-0040-yen
dc.referencesPadilla Cruz, Manuel. 2013a. Understanding and overcoming pragmatic failure in intercultural communication: From focus on speakers to focus on hearers. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching 51 (1). 23-54. doi: doi: 10.1515/iral-2013-0002en
dc.referencesPadilla Cruz, Manuel. 2013b. Metapsychological awareness of comprehension and epistemic vigilance of L2 communication in interlanguage pragmatic development. Journal of Pragmatics 59 (A). 117-135. doi: doi: 10.1016/j.pragma.2013.09.005en
dc.referencesPadilla Cruz, Manuel. 2014. Pragmatic Failure, Epistemic Injustice and Epistemic Vigilance. Language & Communication 39. 34-50. doi: doi: 10.1016/j.langcom.2014.08.002en
dc.referencesPadilla Cruz, Manuel. 2015. On the Role of Vigilance in the Interpretation of Puns. Humor. International Journal of Humor Research 28 (3). 469-490. doi: doi: 10.1515/humor-2015-0068en
dc.referencesPadilla Cruz, Manuel. 2016. Vigilance Mechanisms in Interpretation: Hermeneutical Vigilance. Studia Linguistica Universitatis Iagellonicae Cracoviensis 133 (1). 21-29. doi: doi: 10.4467/20834624SL.15.001.4890en
dc.referencesPerlis, Donald, Purang, Khemdut and Carl Andersen. 1998. Conversational Adequacy: Mistakes are the Essence. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 48. 553-575. doi: doi: 10.1006/ijhc.1997.0181en
dc.referencesReynolds, Mike. 1995. Where the Trouble Lies: Cross-cultural Pragmatics and Miscommunication. Papers and Studies in Contrastive Linguistics 30. 5-15.en
dc.referencesRyan, Jonathon and Roger Barnard. 2009. “Who Do You Mean?” Investigating Miscommunication in Paired Interactions. The TESOLANZ Journal 17. 44-62.en
dc.referencesSebanz, Natalie and Guenther Knoblich. 2009. Prediction in Joint Action: What, when, and where. Topics in Cognitive Science 1. 353-367. doi: doi: 10.1111/j.1756-8765.2009.01024.xen
dc.referencesShintel, Hadas and Boaz Keysar. 2009. Less is More: A Minimalist Account of Joint Action in Communication. Topics in Cognitive Science 1. 260-273. doi: doi: 10.1111/j.1756-8765.2009.01018.xen
dc.referencesSpencer-Oatey, Helen D. 1996. Reconsidering Power and Distance. Journal of Pragmatics 26: 1-24. doi: doi: 10.1016/0379-2166(95)00047-Xen
dc.referencesSperber, Dan. 1994. Understanding Verbal Understanding. In Jean Khalfa (ed.), What Is Intelligence?, 179-198. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.en
dc.referencesSperber, Dan. 1996. Explaining Culture. A Naturalistic Approach. Oxford: Blackwell.en
dc.referencesSperber, Dan. 1997. Intuitive and Reflective Beliefs. Mind & Language 12 (1). 67-83. doi: doi: 10.1111/j.1468-0017.1997.tb00062.xen
dc.referencesSperber, Dan. (ed.). 2000. Metarepresentations. A Multidisciplinary Perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press.en
dc.referencesSperber, Dan. 2013. Speakers are Honest Because Hearers are Vigilant. Reply to Kourken Michaelian. Episteme 10 (1). 61-71. doi: doi: 10.1017/epi.2013.7en
dc.referencesSperber, Dan and Hugo Mercier. 2012. Reasoning as a Social Competence. In Helene Landemore and Jon Elster (eds.), Collective Wisdom: Principles and Mechanisms, 368-392. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.en
dc.referencesSperber, Dan and Deirdre Wilson. 1986. Relevance. Communication and Cognition. Oxford: Blackwell.en
dc.referencesSperber, Dan and Deirdre Wilson. 1995. Relevance. Communication and Cognition. 2nd edn. Oxford: Blackwell.en
dc.referencesSperber, Dan and Deirdre Wilson. 2015. Beyond Speaker’s Meaning. Croatian Journal of Philosophy 15 (44). 117-149.en
dc.referencesSperber, Dan et al. 2010. Epistemic Vigilance. Mind & Language 25 (4). 359-393. doi: doi: 10.1111/j.1468-0017.2010.01394.xen
dc.referencesTannen, Deborah. 1984. The Pragmatics of Cross-Cultural Communication. Applied Linguistics 5 (3). 188-195. doi: doi: 10.1093/applin/5.3.189en
dc.referencesTannen, Deborah. 1991. You Just Don’t Understand. Women and Men in Conversation. London: Virago Press.en
dc.referencesTannen, Deborah. 1992. That’s not What I Meant! How Conversational Style Makes or Breaks Your Relations with Others. London: Virago Press.en
dc.referencesTannen, Deborah. 1994. Talking from 9 to 5. Women and Men at Work: Language, Sex and Power. London: Virago Press.en
dc.referencesThomas, Jenny. 1983. Cross-cultural Pragmatic Failure. Applied Linguistics 4 (2). 91-112. doi: doi: 10.1093/applin/4.2.91en
dc.referencesTodd, Andrew R. et al. 2011. When Focusing on Differences Leads to Similar Perspectives. Psychological Science 22 (1). 134-141. doi: doi: 10.1177/0956797610392929en
dc.referencesVerdonik, Darinka. 2010. Between Understanding and Misunderstanding. Journal of Pragmatics 42. 1364-1379. doi: doi: 10.1016/j.pragma.2009.09.00710.1016/j.pragma.2009.09.007en
dc.referencesWeigand, Edda. 1999. Misunderstanding: The Standard Case. Journal of Pragmatics 31. 763-785. doi: doi: 10.1016/S0378-2166(98)00068-Xen
dc.referencesWeizman, Elda. 1999. Building True Understanding Via Apparent Miscommunication: A Case Study. Journal of Pragmatics 31. 837-846. doi: doi: 10.1016/S0378-2166(96)00057-4en
dc.referencesWells, John C. 1996. Accents of English 1: An Introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.en
dc.referencesWierzbicka, Anna. 1991. Cross-cultural Pragmatics: The Semantics of Human Interaction. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.en
dc.referencesWierzbicka, Anna. 2010. Cross-cultural Communication and Miscommunication: The Role of Cultural Keywords. Intercultural Pragmatics 7 (1). 1-23. doi: doi: 10.1515/iprg.2010.001en
dc.referencesWilson, Deirdre. 1999. Metarepresentation in Linguistic Communication. UCL Working Papers in Linguistics 11. 127-161.en
dc.referencesWilson, Deirdre and Dan Sperber. 2002. Relevance Theory. UCL Working Papers in Linguistics 14. 249-287.en
dc.referencesWilson, Deirdre and Dan Sperber. 2004. Relevance Theory. In Larry Horn and Gregory Ward (eds.), The Handbook of Pragmatics, 607-632. Oxford: Blackwell.en
dc.referencesYus Ramos, Francisco. 1999a. Towards a Pragmatic Taxonomy of Misunderstandings. Revista Canaria de Estudios Ingleses 38. 217-239.en
dc.referencesYus Ramos, Francisco. 1999b. Misunderstandings and Explicit/Implicit Communication. Pragmatics 9 (4). 487-517. doi: doi: 10.1075/prag.9.4.01yusen
dc.referencesYus Ramos, Francisco. 2000. On Reaching the Intended Ironic Interpretation. International Journal of Communication 10 (1-2). 27-78.en
dc.referencesZamborlin, Chiara. 2007. Going Beyond Pragmatic Failures: Dissonance in Intercultural Communication. Intercultural Pragmatics 4 (1). 21-50. doi: doi: 10.1515/IP.2007.002en
dc.referencesŽegarac, Vladimir. 2009. A Cognitive Pragmatic Perspective on Communication and Culture. In Helen D. Spencer-Oatey and Peter Franklin (eds.), Intercultural Interaction: A Multidisciplinary Approach to Intercultural Communication, 31-53. Basingstoke: Palgrave.en

Files in this item


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 License.
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 License.