Resonance within and between linguistic beings

Behavioral and Brain Sciences 27 (2):199-200 (2004)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Pickering & Garrod deserve appreciation for their cogent argument that dialogue merits greater scientific consideration. Current models make little contact with behaviors of dialogue, motivating the interactive alignment theory. However, the theory is not truly “mechanistic.” A full account requires both representations and processes bringing those representations into harmony. We suggest that Grossberg 's adaptive resonance theory may naturally conform to the principles of dialogue

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 93,779

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Full alignment of some but not all representations in dialogue.Holly P. Branigan - 2004 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 27 (2):191-192.
Beyond linguistic alignment.Allan Mazur - 2004 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 27 (2):205-206.
It's good . . . But is it ART?Paul A. Luce, Stephen D. Goldinger & Michael S. Vitevitch - 2000 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 23 (3):336-336.
Dialogue: Can two be cheaper than one?Sam Glucksberg - 2004 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 27 (2):199-199.
Is alignment always the result of automatic priming?Robert M. Krauss & Jennifer S. Pardo - 2004 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 27 (2):203-204.
A call for more dialogue and more details.J. Cooper Cutting - 2004 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 27 (2):194-194.
Toward a mechanistic psychology of dialogue.Martin J. Pickering & Simon Garrod - 2004 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 27 (2):169-190.

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
39 (#397,178)

6 months
16 (#218,426)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references