Abstract

AbstractWhen people use language to communicate, their intended meanings are not always conveyed by words alone. Instead, speakers sometimes convey their meaning in a relatively subtle, or indirect, fashion, and this requires some interpretation on the part of the receiver. In this study we investigated differences between US liberals and conservatives in their interpretation of conversation utterances that have these types of potential indirect meanings. Past research demonstrating cognitive differences between conservatives and liberals suggests liberals should be more likely than conservatives to engage in cognitive processes designed to uncover potential indirect meanings. To test this, we created a conversation between two businessmen that contained five types of indirect utterances that were chosen from the pragmatics literature. Participants were asked to rate the likelihood of an indirect interpretation of each of these utterances, as well as two control utterances that did not convey an indirect meaning. In three studies (Total N = 664) liberals were significantly more likely to endorse the indirect interpretations of these utterances (but not the control utterances) than were conservatives. Several possible cognitive mediators (Empathy Quotient, Need for Cognition, and Cognitive Flexibility) were examined but did not account for the effect. The results demonstrate an important interactional implication of the cognitive processing differences between liberals and conservatives. Future research should attempt to extend these findings by using different utterances and contexts, as well as examining other potential mediators.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call