3 ms·
...but the author is using it to support the point that "...we slip in what we think a foreign speaker means to say, particularly when their accent has low soci
by panglott 11y ago
...but the author is using it to support the point that "...we slip in what we think a foreign speaker means to say, particularly when their accent has low social standing." Which seems like it should mean that the participants would have a higher false memory rate with the British speaker.
It's an interesting question, though, whether a working-class New York accent is less "foreign" than an upper-class British accent to a Stanford University student.
- bahargholipour 11y agoMaybe you are not interpreting the term "false memory" in the right way: Here, false memory means that they falsely remembered something that didn't actually exist (a word that the New Yorker had not said). It's only a term used in the study to "describe" their action. In reality, they perfectly remembered that the New Yorker had not said a word that was previously on the list. But they assumed it was the New Yorker's "mistake." With the Brit, they assume it was his "intention" to drop a word. Also, another thing is confused here and you are right. For this: "...we slip in what we think a foreign speaker means to say, particularly when their accent has low social standing." The study is used to support specifically the latter part, that is, bias against accents with low social standing. Not foreignness. (An accent can be native but have low social status, it can be foreign AND low social status, or it can be foreign like the British one but have high social status.)