The effect of online methods on epistemic inference and scalar implicature

How is research on semantics and pragmatics impacted by the growing use of online methodologies, and how does the modality of presentation impact our ability to detect and use a speaker's knowledge state in the service of a linguistic inference? In three experiments, we investigated scalar implicatures both in-person and across three online modalities (text, text + pictures, and video) using a task that required participants to monitor contextual information to infer the mental states of speakers (i.e., whether they were knowledgeable or ignorant with respect to stronger alternative statements). In Experiments 1 and 2 we found no consistent differences across modalities in rates of scalar implicatures, and found that participants rarely computed implicatures when speakers were ignorant (i.e., participants were sensitive to a speaker's knowledge state across all modalities). However, in these first two experiments participants were explicitly reminded to monitor the knowledge state of speakers. In Experiment 3, when these reminders were removed, we again found no effect of modality when speakers were knowledgeable, but found a significant effect when speakers were ignorant. In particular, participants were more likely to erroneously compute implicatures when tested in-person relative to when they were tested online with text only, or with text and pictures. These findings suggestf that online methods may in certain cases offer a useful alternative to in-person testing of pragmatic reasoning, but that care should be taken in selecting methods when they probe subtle mental state reasoning. • Online methods reliably test implicatures when speaker knowledge is emphasized. • Implicature rates differ via modality when speaker knowledge isn't emphasized. • In-person tests lead to over-computed implicatures when the speaker lacks knowledge. • Text methods cause more errors in tracking speaker knowledge than other methods. • Errors in text-only settings don't affect implicature rates despite knowledge issues.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Pragmatics
Published
2025-05-02
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2025.04.006
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Educational Strategies and Epistemologies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
3.44
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

The effect of online methods on epistemic inference and scalar implicature

David Barner, Alan Bale, Maho Takahashi, Miguel Mejia
1 citations
Journal of Pragmatics
Educational Strategies and Epistemologies
3.44
article

The effect of online methods on epistemic inference and scalar implicature

David Barner, Alan Bale, Maho Takahashi, Miguel Mejia
article en
1 citations

Abstract

How is research on semantics and pragmatics impacted by the growing use of online methodologies, and how does the modality of presentation impact our ability to detect and use a speaker's knowledge state in the service of a linguistic inference? In three experiments, we investigated scalar implicatures both in-person and across three online modalities (text, text + pictures, and video) using a task that required participants to monitor contextual information to infer the mental states of speakers (i.e., whether they were knowledgeable or ignorant with respect to stronger alternative statements). In Experiments 1 and 2 we found no consistent differences across modalities in rates of scalar implicatures, and found that participants rarely computed implicatures when speakers were ignorant (i.e., participants were sensitive to a speaker's knowledge state across all modalities). However, in these first two experiments participants were explicitly reminded to monitor the knowledge state of speakers. In Experiment 3, when these reminders were removed, we again found no effect of modality when speakers were knowledgeable, but found a significant effect when speakers were ignorant. In particular, participants were more likely to erroneously compute implicatures when tested in-person relative to when they were tested online with text only, or with text and pictures. These findings suggestf that online methods may in certain cases offer a useful alternative to in-person testing of pragmatic reasoning, but that care should be taken in selecting methods when they probe subtle mental state reasoning. • Online methods reliably test implicatures when speaker knowledge is emphasized. • Implicature rates differ via modality when speaker knowledge isn't emphasized. • In-person tests lead to over-computed implicatures when the speaker lacks knowledge. • Text methods cause more errors in tracking speaker knowledge than other methods. • Errors in text-only settings don't affect implicature rates despite knowledge issues.

Journal of PragmaticsVol. 242
University of California San Diego (US), Concordia University (US), Concordia University (CA)
Openalex Percentile: Top 10%
Educational Strategies and Epistemologies
3.44
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.