PofoliaShared via Pofolia

Cognitive Science· 2026Q1

Comprehenders' Error Correction Mechanisms Are Finely Calibrated to Language Production Statistics

Peng Qian, Roger Lévy

Short summary

Comprehenders' interpretations of subject-verb agreement errors closely mirror language production error statistics, supporting the hypothesis that humans use finely calibrated noisy-channel models for robust understanding.

AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.

Key points

  • Comprehenders' error correction strategies are finely calibrated to language production statistics.
  • Participants' interpretations of subject-verb agreement errors mirrored structure-sensitive error likelihoods.
  • Bayesian analysis showed interpretations reflected both prior expectations and error rates.
  • Results support the noisy-channel hypothesis for robust language understanding.

AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.

Abstract

An essential feature of human communication is robustness to errors: even when speakers and writers make mistakes, listeners and readers can usually determine the intended meaning. A leading hypothesis is that comprehenders achieve robust error correction by internally deploying a "noisy-channel" model of the language production process. Crucially, to best achieve error robustness, a comprehender's noisy-channel model should be finely calibrated to the environmental statistics of language production, incorporating not only prior expectations about communicative intents but also structure-sensitive likelihoods of different types of speaker error. This environmentally calibrated noisy-channel hypothesis has been difficult to test, because the rates of most types of language production errors are hard to estimate. Here, we test this hypothesis by experimentally investigating comprehenders' interpretations of subject-verb agreement errors, for which context-contingent language production error rates are feasible to estimate. In a novel free-form error correction task, participants edited sentences with subject-verb agreement mismatches to indicate what they think was intended. Bayesian analysis of the resulting data shows that comprehenders' interpretations reflect both item-specific prior expectations and structure-sensitive error likelihoods that closely correspond to error rates in language production. These results provide quantitative evidence that humans closely track prior statistics over linguistic forms and deploy a noisy-channel model finely calibrated to statistics of the linguistic environment to achieve robust language understanding.

The authors' abstract, as published at the source. Cognitive Science, 2026 · DOI ↗

TakeawaysPremium
Ask the paperFree account

Continue with a free account

Ask the paper: 3 free questions a day about this paper; save it, get its citation, new summaries every day for your field. Takeaways are Premium.

Continue free on the web

Sign in with Google or Apple; no card needed. You come back to this paper.

On your phone:

Field: Cognitive Neuroscience

Cognitive NeuroscienceNeuroscience