This Article Full Text (PDF) All Versions of this Article: 0261927X07313656v1 27/2/182    most recent References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Reprints and Permissions Add to My Marked Citations Google Scholar Articles by Fiedler, K. Social Bookmarking                   What's this?

The Implicit Meta-Theory That Has Inspired and Restricted LCM Research

Why Some Studies Were Conducted but Others Not

University of Heidelberg, kf{at}psychologie.uni-heidelberg.de

Two decades of research on the linguistic category model (LCM) have resulted in considerable empirical evidence that can be organized by distinct paradigms: the linguistic intergroup bias, the linguistic expectancy bias, the question-answering paradigm, and language-based attribution. The present article explicates the metatheory underlying the research that was actually conducted within these paradigms. This metatheory provides the organizing structure for a review of potential LCM research that has not been conducted yet because it does not fit the common metatheory. Untapped LCM research encompasses communication failures, deception, the inclusion of measures of effective communication, and the joint determination of language and cognition by social roles and ecological constraints. Because many of these often overlooked topics are theoretically important and practically useful, they suggest themselves as prominent goals of future research.

Key Words: common ground • referential communication • linguistic intergroup bias • verbal priming • deception

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?