Social identity, precision and charity: when less precise speakers are held to stricter standard

Abstract

Recent has begun to show systematic connections between social information and pragmatic reasoning. These findings raise the question of whether social information shapes comprehenders' assessments of the correctness of linguistic description in light of a single known and determined fact. We explore this question by testing the impact of speaker identity on T(ruth)-V(alue) J(udgment)s based on the interpretation of number words. We find that imprecise statements from speakers socially expected to be less precise – i.e. “Chill" ones – are rejected at a higher rate, and thus held to more stringent evaluation standards, than those from speakers socially expected to speak more precisely – i.e. “Nerdy" ones. We explain the new finding by appealing to the idea that, by virtue of generally being perceived to be more precise, Nerdy speakers are granted higher epistemic credibility than Chill ones. The emerging picture is one in which TVJ assessments are affected by social considerations in a different way from other experimental tasks, suggesting a nuanced interplay between social information and different interpretation tasks and processes