The two-page article by Professor Sumner serves as a great
introduction to the Sumner & Kataoka and the Sumner & King experiments
that were also assigned this week. This article published on TICS introduces the
concept of social weighting, which is when social biases influence how we use
our cognitive capacities to process language. Social weighing also helps to
explain recognition equivalence – the fact that some words that we hear
frequently can be understood as well as some words that we rarely hear.
The concept of recognition equivalence is the backbone of
the experiment by Sumner and Kataoka, and social weighting explains that the
less dense, yet more robust encoding for British English (and vice-versa for
General English) in GE-speaking participants allows recognition equivalence in
word priming tasks. This study highlights that word frequency is not the main
factor determining how individuals internalize the language they hear.
Social weighting is also relevant in the experiment by
Sumner and King. This study concludes that vocal cues from speakers of
different backgrounds influence how listeners interpret spoken words from those
speakers, even when these words are identical to one another. In the case of
this particular study, the word “yeast” triggers different related words
depending on the speaker who voiced it.
In general, what all of these readings point to is that social
weighting is a heuristic for interpreting language. It is a process that
sacrifices accuracy for efficiency. It seems that when we map sound patterns to
social representations, we ultimately process them quicker, but we often end up
making inaccurate assumptions and adopting attitudes that are not appropriate
for the situation at hand.
For example, hearing only a child’s voice explain a
sophisticated mathematical concept might trigger in us the assumption that the
speaker is innocent and naïve, and we might automatically give their words less
weight. Although probably not the case, the child might be able to explain the
concept perfectly. If this were so, then our false assumptions and attitudes of
disregard would have made us ignore most of the explanation.
Heuristics are also present in many disciplines besides
linguistics, such as in social psychology. The availability heuristic, for
example, is a mental process that calculates the probability of a certain event
happening based on the speed at which examples of that event happening in real
life come to mind. Because it is easy to recall examples of airplane accidents,
people (because of this heuristic) tend to overestimate how frequently airplane
crashes happen.
I believe that simply being aware that these heuristics
exist can help people avoid their flaws in social psychology, in linguistics,
and in any discipline they exist. Being aware that our minds may often make
unwanted assumptions allows us to be on the lookout for these flawed processes
and thus, to question our thoughts very carefully when we listen.
Gerardo the-ripped-minotaur Rendon... I found your discussion of the availability heuristic interestingaf. I feel like these heuristics are intrinsic to human nature, and as we are being taught in 221 right now, even computers find them useful. Previous situations are assessed by computers in order to determine how to act in the future. Depending on the problem being solved, the cost can be heavy or inconsequential, but always quantifiable (according to what we've learned so far). In human relationships, I agree that one must be thoughtful about the actions we take based on generalizations, especially because they aren't quantifiable but can be hugely aggravating to entire groups.
ReplyDeleteGerardoRendonaf, thanks for making the great point about how heuristics sacrifice accuracy for speed. It's an important takeaway from these conversations. It's fascinating as well to wonder why the exist. What cognitive mechanisms or even evolutionary advantages exist that lead us to use heuristics like these? And what can we do beyond just being aware of the heuristics to prevent them from impairing our judgement of others? I think super interesting answers to these questions probably exist in the areas of developmental and social psychology and can be applied to schools, communities, and workplaces.
ReplyDeleteDear Mccabeaf, in your response to Gerardo the-ripped-minotaur Rendon you mention evolutionary advantages. Do you mean to say that some of these heuristics are inherited?
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete