Alternative-based commitment: Commitment is modulated by the salience and likelihood of the alternative interpretation

Abstract

Dialogue involves a complex negotiation of commitments, wherein listeners interpret and determine the speaker's degree of commitment to inferred meanings. In the current study, we examine factors that affect speaker's perceived commitment, focusing on alternative interpretations. We propose the Alternative-Based Commitment (ABC) hypothesis, suggesting that alternative interpretations to the inferred meaning can modify the perception of commitment. In Experiment 1, we assess this hypothesis prior to the disclosure of the speaker's actual intended meaning. Experiment 2 further investigates the ABC hypothesis, as well as the overall effect of knowing the actual state of affairs, both when the intended meaning is voided (Experiment 2.a) and when it is affirmed (Experiment 2.b). Across all state of affairs, alternatives influenced perceived commitment, provided the alternative was both salient and likely. Perceived commitment was also modulated by the state of affairs: it was highest when it affirmed the inferred meaning, intermediate when it was not yet disclosed, and lowest when it voided the inferred meaning. These results suggest that we incorporate alternatives in our speaker's model, which in turn impacts perceived commitment to inferences. However, this incorporation depends on what we consider as a likely alternative. All taken together, perceived commitment is moderated both by the alternative interpretation and by the perpetually shifting dynamics of conversation.