Inferenza e attribuzione delle intenzioni comunicative

Welcome to the SentochePosso class in the playlist dedicated to the Psychology of Communication. In this lesson, we will continue to discuss INTENTION AND COMMUNICATION, specifically INFERENCE AND ATTRIBUTION OF COMMUNICATIVE INTENTIONS. Every message requires inference for its interpretation. The recipient is able to develop a hypothesis about the meaning of the message based on communicative cues (sentence, facial expressions, etc.). To this end, they employ a series of MENTAL MODELS. Mental representations of real, hypothetical, and imaginary situations. They are used to predict events and the interlocutor's future moves. DEMONSTRATIVE INFERENCE: applying deductive rules to a set of starting premises. (e.g., syllogisms) Sperber and Wilson: NON-DEMONSTRATIVE INFERENCE The strength of an explanation and interpretation of what is communicated depends on its degree of plausibility. Factual explanations connected to the representation of contingent facts and episodes come into play. This inference uses logical processes, albeit imperfect ones (the human mind searches for elements to explain what the interlocutor communicates). The recipient is able to make IMPLICATIONS about what the speaker communicates: inferring more than what was said. We do not proceed in a random and totally arbitrary manner. In conditions of default, we rely on incomplete and approximate mental representations. They use clues and information but are far from having achieved an optimization of the knowledge and premises contained in the message. We use three fundamental forms of inference: DEDUCTION INDUCTION ABDUCTION In exchanges with default, abduction is used predominantly, with the risk of FIXATION processes. COMMUNICATIVE: Attentional concentration on partial and limited aspects of what has been communicated, assuming these aspects as if they were the entire message. We focus on the initial hypothesis and look for clues to confirm it (a form of functional fixation of attention and thought). HEURISTICS come into play: simplified and economical forms of reasoning. REPRESENTATIVENESS: the tendency to deem a statement acceptable or unacceptable based on one's stereotypical knowledge. CONFIRMATION: Identifying only the clues/elements that confirm our hypothesis without considering those that falsify or disprove it. AVAILABILITY: Considering information about an event credible because it is consistent with the probability of confirmation of that event. This approach is also found in Counterfactual Reasoning: if... So "if I had taken the usual route, I wouldn't have been stuck for hours." An antecedent is modified to obtain an outcome different from the actual one. We have a cognitive comparison between a real fact and an alternative hp that did not occur but could have occurred, and which takes on the value of a reference norm. Abductive inference + heuristics + counterfactual reasoning: • The recipient proceeds with LIMITED RATIONALITY • Participants can reach only one local optimum at a time on the CM level. Source: Anolli L. (2006), Foundations of Communication Psychology, Bologna: Il Mulino. #sentocheposso #psychologyofcommunication #communication ========================================================= Subscribe to my channel if you haven't already and click the bell icon to stay up to date. Visit my blog by clicking the link in the description and follow sentocheposso on Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter, where I post daily content about learning, study methods, learning to learn, guidance, and school-family relationships. I'm Doriana Bertolotto, a trainer, guidance counselor, learning process expert, and founder of #sentocheposso. Follow me: Subscribe to my channel:    / @sentocheposso   Visit the blog: https://www.sentocheposso.com Facebook:   / sentocheposso   Instagram:   / sentocheposso   Twitter:   / sentochep