Thesis supervisor: István Winkler
Location of studies (in Hungarian): BME KTT Abbreviation of location of studies: BME
Description of the research topic:
How do we understand each other in our everyday interactions? Communicative actions (e.g., speech, facial displays, gestures, etc.) by themselves are always ambiguous in that their meaning depends on the shared knowledge of the agents (e.g., Sperber andWilson, 1995). Even speech alone, which is based on the coding system of language, under-determines the intended meaning, and therefore, it needs to be supplemented by inferential processes (e.g., Scott-Phillips, 2014). Psychological theories of communication have answered this question by framing communication in terms of the development of a “shared conceptual space” (e.g., Pickering and Garrod, 2004; Stolk et al., 2016). They suggest that in a dialogue, interlocutors map out the discrepancies between their understandings of a situation (situation models), and align their representations incrementally, until the shared conceptual space enables them to fulfill the goal of the interaction. The aim of our research is to ground the notion of shared conceptual space in basic psychological and neural processes. Specifically, we argue that communicating agents aim to elicit predictable responses (cf., Clark, 2013; Wolpert et al., 2003) from the partner and by doing so they build up more precise models of eachother over time, which determines the quality/efficacy of communication. Predicted responses provide confirmation of the success of one’s communication, a means for regulating turn-taking and information flow, and help to detect new (unpredicted) information. We test these hypotheses by simultaneously measuring the behavior (gaze direction, movements, speech) and brain electric activity (EEG) of the interacting partners.
Clark, A. (2013). Whatever next? Predictive brains, situated agents, and the future of cognitive science. Behavioral and brain sciences, 36(3), 181-204.
18Pickering, M. J.,& Garrod, S. (2004). Toward a mechanistic psychology of dialogue. Behavioral and brain sciences, 27(2), 169-190.Scott-Phillips, T. (2014). Speaking our minds: Why human communication is different, and how language evolved to make it special. Macmillan International Higher Education.Sperber, D. & Wilson, D. (1995). Relevance: Communication and Cognition. Second edition. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.Stolk, A., Verhagen, L., & Toni, I. (2016). Conceptual alignment: How brains achieve mutual understanding. Trends in cognitive sciences, 20(3), 180-191.Wolpert, D. M., Doya, K., & Kawato, M. (2003). A unifying computational framework for motor control and social interaction. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences,358(1431), 593-602
Required language skills: English Further requirements: The ideal candidate is interested in the questions of human communication and would like to study them from a cognitive neuroscience perspective.
Number of students who can be accepted: 1
Deadline for application: 2024-05-31
2024. IV. 17. ODT ülés Az ODT következő ülésére 2024. június 14-én, pénteken 10.00 órakor kerül sor a Semmelweis Egyetem Szenátusi termében (Bp. Üllői út 26. I. emelet).
Login
