The Influence of Shared Visual Context on the Successful Emergence of Conventions in a Referential Communication Task

Human communication is thoroughly context bound. We present two experiments investigating the importance of the shared context, that is, the amount of knowledge two interlocutors have in common, for the successful emergence and use of novel conventions. Using a referential communication task where black‐and‐white pictorial symbols are used to convey colors, pairs of participants build shared conventions peculiar to their dyad without experimenter feedback, relying purely on ostensive‐inferential communication. Both experiments demonstrate that access to the visual context promotes more successful communication. Importantly, success improves cumulatively, supporting the view that pairs establish conventional ways of using the symbols to communicate. Furthermore, Experiment 2 suggests that dyads with access to the visual context successfully adapt the conventions built for one color space to another color space, unlike dyads lacking it. In linking experimental pragmatics with language evolution, the study illustrates the benefits of exploring the emergence of linguistic conventions using an ostensive‐inferential model of communication.     

When two limbs are weaker than one: Sensorimotor syncopation with alternating hands

This study addresses the demands of alternating bimanual syncopation, a coordination mode in which the two hands move in alternation while tapping in antiphase with a metronomic tone sequence. Musically trained participants were required to engage in alternating bimanual syncopation and five other coordination modes: unimanual syncopation where taps are made (with the left or right hand) after every tone; unimanual syncopation where taps are made after every other tone; bimanual synchronization with alternating hands; unimanual synchronized tapping with every tone; and unimanual tapping with every other tone. Variability in tap timing was greatest overall for alternating bimanual syncopation, indicating that it is the most difficult. This appears to be due to instability arising from the simultaneous presence of two levels of antiphase coordination (one between the pacing sequence and the hands, the other between the two hands) rather than factors relating to movement frequency or dexterity limits of the nonpreferred hand.     

What is Epistemological Violence in the Empirical Social Sciences?

This article discusses the meaning of epistemological violence in the empirical social sciences. It is argued that the concept is closer to personal than to structural violence in that it has a subject, an object, and an action, even if the violence is indirect and nonphysical: the subject of violence is the researcher, the object is the Other, and the action is the interpretation of data that is presented as knowledge. Using a hypothetical example, the problem of interpretation in empirical research on the Other is discussed. Epistemological violence refers to the interpretation of social-scientific data on the Other and is produced when empirical data are interpreted as showing the inferiority of or problematizes the Other, even when data allow for equally viable alternative interpretations. Interpretations of inferiority or problematizations are understood as actions that have a negative impact on the Other. Because the interpretations of data emerge from an academic context and thus are presented as knowledge, they are defined as epistemologically violent actions. Problems, consequences, and practices surrounding this concept are discussed.