Works by Kenny Smith
33 found
Order:
1 filter applied
- Compression and communication in the cultural evolution of linguistic structure.Simon Kirby,Monica Tamariz,Hannah Cornish &Kenny Smith -2015 -Cognition 141 (C):87-102.
- Eliminating unpredictable variation through iterated learning.Kenny Smith &Elizabeth Wonnacott -2010 -Cognition 116 (3):444-449.
- Evolving artificial sign languages in the lab: From improvised gesture to systematic sign.Yasamin Motamedi,Marieke Schouwstra,Kenny Smith,Jennifer Culbertson &Simon Kirby -2019 -Cognition 192 (C):103964.No categories
- Non‐adjacent Dependency Learning in Humans and Other Animals.Benjamin Wilson,Michelle Spierings,Andrea Ravignani,Jutta L. Mueller,Toben H. Mintz,Frank Wijnen,Anne Kant,Kenny Smith &Arnaud Rey -2020 -Topics in Cognitive Science 12 (3):843-858.Wilson et al. focus on one class of AGL tasks: the cognitively demanding task of detecting non‐adjacent dependencies (NADs) among items. They provide a typology of the different types of NADs in natural languages and in AGL tasks. A range of cues affect NAD learning, ranging from the variability and number of intervening elements to the presence of shared prosodic cues between the dependent items. These cues, important for humans to discover non‐adjacent dependencies, are also found to facilitate NAD learning (...) in several nonhuman animal species. (shrink)
- Zipf’s Law of Abbreviation and the Principle of Least Effort: Language users optimise a miniature lexicon for efficient communication.Jasmeen Kanwal,Kenny Smith,Jennifer Culbertson &Simon Kirby -2017 -Cognition 165 (C):45-52.No categories
- Contextual predictability shapes signal autonomy.James Winters,Simon Kirby &Kenny Smith -2018 -Cognition 176 (C):15-30.No categories
- Cross-Situational Learning: An Experimental Study of Word-Learning Mechanisms.Kenny Smith,Andrew D. M. Smith &Richard A. Blythe -2011 -Cognitive Science 35 (3):480-498.Cross-situational learning is a mechanism for learning the meaning of words across multiple exposures, despite exposure-by-exposure uncertainty as to the word's true meaning. We present experimental evidence showing that humans learn words effectively using cross-situational learning, even at high levels of referential uncertainty. Both overall success rates and the time taken to learn words are affected by the degree of referential uncertainty, with greater referential uncertainty leading to less reliable, slower learning. Words are also learned less successfully and more slowly (...) if they are presented interleaved with occurrences of other words, although this effect is relatively weak. We present additional analyses of participants’ trial-by-trial behavior showing that participants make use of various cross-situational learning strategies, depending on the difficulty of the word-learning task. When referential uncertainty is low, participants generally apply a rigorous eliminative approach to cross-situational learning. When referential uncertainty is high, or exposures to different words are interleaved, participants apply a frequentist approximation to this eliminative approach. We further suggest that these two ways of exploiting cross-situational information reside on a continuum of learning strategies, underpinned by a single simple associative learning mechanism. (shrink)
- The cognitive roots of regularization in language.Vanessa Ferdinand,Simon Kirby &Kenny Smith -2019 -Cognition 184 (C):53-68.No categories
- Non‐adjacent Dependency Learning in Humans and Other Animals.Benjamin Wilson,Michelle Spierings,Andrea Ravignani,Jutta L. Mueller,Toben H. Mintz,Frank Wijnen,Anne van der Kant,Kenny Smith &Arnaud Rey -2018 -Topics in Cognitive Science 12 (3):843-858.Wilson et al. focus on one class of AGL tasks: the cognitively demanding task of detecting non‐adjacent dependencies (NADs) among items. They provide a typology of the different types of NADs in natural languages and in AGL tasks. A range of cues affect NAD learning, ranging from the variability and number of intervening elements to the presence of shared prosodic cues between the dependent items. These cues, important for humans to discover non‐adjacent dependencies, are also found to facilitate NAD learning (...) in several nonhuman animal species. (shrink)
- From partners to populations: A hierarchical Bayesian account of coordination and convention.Robert D. Hawkins,Michael Franke,Michael C. Frank,Adele E. Goldberg,Kenny Smith,Thomas L. Griffiths &Noah D. Goodman -2023 -Psychological Review 130 (4):977-1016.
- Simplicity and informativeness in semantic category systems.Jon W. Carr,Kenny Smith,Jennifer Culbertson &Simon Kirby -2020 -Cognition 202 (C):104289.No categories
- (1 other version)Minimal Requirements for the Emergence of Learned Signaling.Matthew Spike,Kevin Stadler,Simon Kirby &Kenny Smith -2016 -Cognitive Science 40 (7):623-658.The emergence of signaling systems has been observed in numerous experimental and real-world contexts, but there is no consensus on which shared mechanisms underlie such phenomena. A number of explanatory mechanisms have been proposed within several disciplines, all of which have been instantiated as credible working models. However, they are usually framed as being mutually incompatible. Using an exemplar-based framework, we replicate these models in a minimal configuration which allows us to directly compare them. This reveals that the development of (...) optimal signaling is driven by similar mechanisms in each model, which leads us to propose three requirements for the emergence of conventional signaling. These are the creation and transmission of referential information, a systemic bias against ambiguity, and finally some form of information loss. Considering this, we then discuss some implications for theoretical and experimental approaches to the emergence of learned communication. (shrink)No categories
- Word Meanings Evolve to Selectively Preserve Distinctions on Salient Dimensions.Catriona Silvey,Simon Kirby &Kenny Smith -2015 -Cognitive Science 39 (1):212-226.Words refer to objects in the world, but this correspondence is not one-to-one: Each word has a range of referents that share features on some dimensions but differ on others. This property of language is called underspecification. Parts of the lexicon have characteristic patterns of underspecification; for example, artifact nouns tend to specify shape, but not color, whereas substance nouns specify material but not shape. These regularities in the lexicon enable learners to generalize new words appropriately. How does the lexicon (...) come to have these helpful regularities? We test the hypothesis that systematic backgrounding of some dimensions during learning and use causes language to gradually change, over repeated episodes of transmission, to produce a lexicon with strong patterns of underspecification across these less salient dimensions. This offers a cultural evolutionary mechanism linking individual word learning and generalization to the origin of regularities in the lexicon that help learners generalize words appropriately. (shrink)
- The Impact of Information Structure on the Emergence of Differential Object Marking: An Experimental Study.Shira Tal,Kenny Smith,Jennifer Culbertson,Eitan Grossman &Inbal Arnon -2022 -Cognitive Science 46 (3):e13119.Cognitive Science, Volume 46, Issue 3, March 2022.
- How Culture and Biology Interact to Shape Language and the Language Faculty.Kenny Smith -2018 -Topics in Cognitive Science 12 (2):690-712.Smith gives an excellent overview on research in language evolution, in which he discusses several recent models of how linguistic systems and the cognitive capacities involved in language learning may have co‐evolved. He illustrates how combined pressures on language learning and communication/use produce compositionally structured languages. Once in place, a (culturally transmitted) communication system creates new selection pressures on the capacity for acquiring these systems.
- Learning Times for Large Lexicons Through Cross‐Situational Learning.Richard A. Blythe,Kenny Smith &Andrew D. M. Smith -2010 -Cognitive Science 34 (4):620-642.No categories
- Word learning under infinite uncertainty.Richard A. Blythe,Andrew D. M. Smith &Kenny Smith -2016 -Cognition 151 (C):18-27.No categories
- A computational model of the cultural co-evolution of language and mindreading.Marieke Woensdregt,Chris Cummins &Kenny Smith -2020 -Synthese 199 (1-2):1347-1385.Several evolutionary accounts of human social cognition posit that language has co-evolved with the sophisticated mindreading abilities of modern humans. It has also been argued that these mindreading abilities are the product of cultural, rather than biological, evolution. Taken together, these claims suggest that the evolution of language has played an important role in the cultural evolution of human social cognition. Here we present a new computational model which formalises the assumptions that underlie this hypothesis, in order to explore how (...) language and mindreading interact through cultural evolution. This model treats communicative behaviour as an interplay between the context in which communication occurs, an agent’s individual perspective on the world, and the agent’s lexicon. However, each agent’s perspective and lexicon are private mental representations, not directly observable to other agents. Learners are therefore confronted with the task of jointly inferring the lexicon and perspective of their cultural parent, based on their utterances in context. Simulation results show that given these assumptions, an informative lexicon evolves not just under a pressure to be successful at communicating, but also under a pressure for accurate perspective-inference. When such a lexicon evolves, agents become better at inferring others’ perspectives; not because their innate ability to learn about perspectives changes, but because sharing a language with others helps them to do so. (shrink)
- Adult Learning and Language Simplification.Mark Atkinson,Kenny Smith &Simon Kirby -2018 -Cognitive Science 42 (8):2818-2854.Languages spoken in larger populations are relatively simple. A possible explanation for this is that languages with a greater number of speakers tend to also be those with higher proportions of non‐native speakers, who may simplify language during learning. We assess this explanation for the negative correlation between population size and linguistic complexity in three experiments, using artificial language learning techniques to investigate both the simplifications made by individual adult learners and the potential for such simplifications to influence group‐level language (...) characteristics. In Experiment 1, we show that individual adult learners trained on a morphologically complex miniature language simplify its morphology. In Experiment 2, we explore how these simplifications may then propagate through subsequent learning. We use the languages produced by the participants of Experiment 1 as the input for a second set of learners, manipulating (a) the proportion of their input which is simplified and (b) the number of speakers they receive their input from. We find, contrary to expectations, that mixing the input from multiple speakers nullifies the simplifications introduced by individuals in Experiment 1; simplifications at the individual level do not result in simplification of the population's language. In Experiment 3, we focus on language use as a mechanism for simplification, exploring the consequences of the interaction between individuals differing in their linguistic competence (as native and non‐native speakers might). We find that speakers who acquire a more complex language than their partner simplify their language during interaction. We ultimately conclude that adult learning can result in languages spoken by more people having simpler morphology, but that idiosyncratic simplifications by non‐natives do not offer a complete explanation in themselves; accommodation—by comparatively competent non‐natives to less competent speakers, or by native speakers to non‐natives—may be a key linking mechanism. (shrink)No categories
- Iterated learning in populations of Bayesian agents.Kenny Smith -2009 - In N. A. Taatgen & H. van Rijn,Proceedings of the 31st Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society. pp. 697--702.
- Compositionality and Linguistic Evolution.Simon Kirby &Kenny Smith -2012 - In Markus Werning, Wolfram Hinzen & Edouard Machery,The Oxford Handbook of Compositionality. Oxford University Press.The productivity of language is subserved by two structural properties: language is recursive, which allows the creation of an infinite number of utterances, and language is compositional, which makes the interpretation of novel utterances possible. A potential explanation for the linkage between the functional properties of compositionality and the compositional structure of language is that this fit arose through cultural, rather than biological, evolution. In order to argue that the compositional structure of language is a product of cultural evolution, it (...) is assumed that language is compositional, socially learned, and therefore culturally transmitted. A well-established solution to the problem of linkage in biological systems is that of evolution by natural selection: adaptation. Compositionality can be explained as a cultural adaptation by language to the problem of transmission through a learning bottleneck. (shrink)No categories
- Conceptual Similarity and Communicative Need Shape Colexification: An Experimental Study.Andres Karjus,Richard A. Blythe,Simon Kirby,Tianyu Wang &Kenny Smith -2021 -Cognitive Science 45 (9):e13035.Colexification refers to the phenomenon of multiple meanings sharing one word in a language. Cross‐linguistic lexification patterns have been shown to be largely predictable, as similar concepts are often colexified. We test a recent claim that, beyond this general tendency, communicative needs play an important role in shaping colexification patterns. We approach this question by means of a series of human experiments, using an artificial language communication game paradigm. Our results across four experiments match the previous cross‐linguistic findings: all other (...) things being equal, speakers do prefer to colexify similar concepts. However, we also find evidence supporting the communicative need hypothesis: when faced with a frequent need to distinguish similar pairs of meanings, speakadjust their colexification preferences to maintain communicative efficiency and avoid colexifying those similar meanings which need to be distinguished in communication. This research provides further evidence to support the argument that languages are shaped by the needs and preferences of their speakers. (shrink)
- Reconsidering human cross-situational learning capacities: A revision to Yu & Smith's (2007) experimental paradigm.Kenny Smith -2009 - In N. A. Taatgen & H. van Rijn,Proceedings of the 31st Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society. pp. 2711--2716.
- The emergence of word-internal repetition through iterated learning: Explaining the mismatch between learning biases and language design.Mitsuhiko Ota,Aitor San José &Kenny Smith -2021 -Cognition 210 (C):104585.
- Interaction Promotes the Adaptation of Referential Conventions to the Communicative Context.Lucía Castillo,Kenny Smith &Holly P. Branigan -2019 -Cognitive Science 43 (8):e12780.Coordination between speakers in dialogue requires balancing repetition and change, the old and the new. Interlocutors tend to reuse established forms, relying on communicative precedents. Yet linguistic interaction also necessitates adaptation to changing contexts or dynamic tasks, which might favor abandoning existing precedents in favor of better communicative alternatives. We explored this tension using a maze game task in which individual participants and interacting pairs had to describe figures and their positions in one of two possible maze types: a regular (...) maze, in which the grid‐like structure of the maze is highlighted, and an irregular maze, in which specific parts of the maze are salient. Participants repeated this task several times. Both individuals and interacting pairs were affected by the different maze layouts, initially using more idiosyncratic description schemes for irregular mazes and more systematic schemes for regular mazes. Interacting pairs, but not individuals, abandoned their unsystematic initial descriptions in favor of a more systematic approach, which was better adapted for repeated interaction. Our results show communicative conventions are initially shaped by context, but interaction opens up the possibility for change if better alternatives are available. (shrink)No categories
- Speakers Align With Their Partner's Overspecification During Interaction.Jia E. Loy &Kenny Smith -2021 -Cognitive Science 45 (12):e13065.Speakers often overspecify by encoding more information than is necessary when referring to an object (e.g., “the blue mug” for the only mug in a group of objects). We investigated the role of a partner's linguistic behavior (whether or not they overspecify) on a speaker's own tendency to overspecify. We used a director–matcher task in which speakers interacted with a partner who either consistently overspecified or minimally specified in the color/size dimension (Experiments 1, 2, and 3), as well as with (...) a partner who switched behaviors midway through interaction (Experiments 4 and 5). We found that speakers aligned with their partner's linguistic behavior to produce overspecific or minimally specific descriptions, and we saw little evidence that the alignment was enhanced by lexical or semantic repetition across prime and target trials. Time‐course analyses showed that alignment increased over the course of the interaction, and speakers appeared to track a change in the partner's linguistic behavior, altering their reference strategy to continue matching that of their partner's. These results demonstrate the persistent influence of a partner's behavior on speakers across the duration of an interaction. (shrink)
- Context and Perceptual Salience Influence the Formation of Novel Stereotypes via Cumulative Cultural Evolution.Jacqui Hutchison,Sheila J. Cunningham,Gillian Slessor,James Urquhart,Kenny Smith &Douglas Martin -2018 -Cognitive Science 42 (S1):186-212.We use a transmission chain method to establish how context and category salience influence the formation of novel stereotypes through cumulative cultural evolution. We created novel alien targets by combining features from three category dimensions—color, movement, and shape—thereby creating social targets that were individually unique but that also shared category membership with other aliens (e.g., two aliens might be the same color and shape but move differently). At the start of the transmission chains each alien was randomly assigned attributes that (...) described it (e.g., arrogant, caring, confident). Participants were given training on the alien‐attribute assignments and were then tested on their memory for these. The alien‐attribute assignments participants produced during test were used as the training materials for the next participant in the transmission chain. As information was repeatedly transmitted an increasingly simplified, learnable stereotype‐like structure emerged for targets who shared the same color, such that by the end of the chains targets who shared the same color were more likely to share the same attributes (a reanalysis of data from Martin et al., which we term Experiment 1). The apparent bias toward the formation of novel stereotypes around the color category dimension was also found for objects (Experiment 2). However, when the category dimension of color was made less salient, it no longer dominated the formation of novel stereotypes (Experiment 3). The current findings suggest that context and category salience influence category dimension salience, which in turn influences the cumulative cultural evolution of information. (shrink)
- Do our modern skulls house stone-age minds?Jane Suilin Lavelle &Kenny Smith -2014 - In Michela Massimi,Philosophy and the Sciences for Everyone. New York, NY: Routledge.No categoriesExport citation
Bookmark - Is a holistic protolanguage a plausible precursor to language?: A test case for a modern evolutionary linguistics.Kenny Smith -2008 -Interaction Studies 9 (1):1-17.
- Is a holistic protolanguage a plausible precursor to language?Kenny Smith -2008 -Interaction Studies. Social Behaviour and Communication in Biological and Artificial Systemsinteraction Studies / Social Behaviour and Communication in Biological and Artificial Systemsinteraction Studies 9 (1):1-17.If protolanguage was a holistic system where complex meanings were conveyed using unanalysed forms, there must be some process which delivered up the elements of modern language from this system. This paper draws on evidence from computational modelling, developmental and historical linguistics and comparative psychology to evaluate the plausibility of the analysis process. While some of the criticisms levelled at analysis can be refuted using such evidence, several areas are highlighted where further evidence is required to decide key issues. More (...) generally, the debate over the nature of protolanguage offers a framework for developing and showcasing a modern, evidence-based evolutionary linguistics. (shrink)No categories
- Introduction. Cultural transmission and the evolution of human behaviour.Kenny Smith,Michael Kalish,Thomas Griffiths &Stephan Lewandowsky -unknownThe articles in this theme issue seek to understand the evolutionary bases of social learning and the consequences of cultural transmission for the evolution of human behaviour. In this introductory article, we provide a summary of these articles and a personal view of some promising lines of development suggested by the work summarized here.
- The brain plus the cultural transmission mechanism determine the nature of language.Kenny Smith,Simon Kirby &Andrew D. M. Smith -2008 -Behavioral and Brain Sciences 31 (5):533-534.We agree that language adapts to the brain, but we note that language also has to adapt to brain-external constraints, such as those arising from properties of the cultural transmission medium. The hypothesis that Christiansen & Chater (C&C) raise in the target article not only has profound consequences for our understanding of language, but also for our understanding of the biological evolution of the language faculty.
- Semantic extension in a novel communication system is facilitated by salient shared associations.Kenny Smith,Josephine Bowerman &Andrew D. M. Smith -2025 -Cognition 261 (C):106129.
Off-campus access
Using PhilPapers from home?
Create an account to enable off-campus access through your institution's proxy server or OpenAthens.
Monitor this page
Be alerted of all new items appearing on this page. Choose how you want to monitor it:
 Email |  RSS feed |
Editorial team
General Editors:
David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Area Editors:
David Bourget
Gwen Bradford
Berit Brogaard
Margaret Cameron
David Chalmers
James Chase
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Esa Diaz-Leon
Barry Hallen
Hans Halvorson
Jonathan Ichikawa
Monte Johnson
Michelle Kosch
Øystein Linnebo
Paul Livingston
Brandon Look
Manolo Martínez
Matthew McGrath
Michiru Nagatsu
Susana Nuccetelli
Giuseppe Primiero
Jack Alan Reynolds
Darrell P. Rowbottom
Aleksandra Samonek
Constantine Sandis
Howard Sankey
Jonathan Schaffer
Thomas Senor
Daniel Star
Jussi Suikkanen
Aness Kim Webster
Other editors
Contact us
Learn more about PhilPapers
David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Area Editors:
David Bourget
Gwen Bradford
Berit Brogaard
Margaret Cameron
David Chalmers
James Chase
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Esa Diaz-Leon
Barry Hallen
Hans Halvorson
Jonathan Ichikawa
Monte Johnson
Michelle Kosch
Øystein Linnebo
Paul Livingston
Brandon Look
Manolo Martínez
Matthew McGrath
Michiru Nagatsu
Susana Nuccetelli
Giuseppe Primiero
Jack Alan Reynolds
Darrell P. Rowbottom
Aleksandra Samonek
Constantine Sandis
Howard Sankey
Jonathan Schaffer
Thomas Senor
Daniel Star
Jussi Suikkanen
Aness Kim Webster
Other editors
Contact us
Learn more about PhilPapers
Home |New books and articles |Bibliographies |Philosophy journals |About PhilPapers |API |Contact us |Code of conduct
PhilPapers logo byAndrea Andrews andMeghan Driscoll.
This site uses cookies and Google Analytics (see ourterms & conditions for details regarding the privacy implications).Use of this site is subject toterms & conditions.
All rights reserved byThe PhilPapers Foundation
Server: philpapers-web-54b44b69b7-72j75 uwo