PDF available here: aliciamchen.github.io/files/chen20... (8/8)

Thanks to my co-authors Matthias Hofer (co-first), @moshepoliak.bsky.social, @rplevy.bsky.social, and @nogazs.bsky.social

Thanks also to our editor @kennysmithed.bsky.social and our anonymous reviewers for the helpful feedback! (7/8)

These results suggest that when both signals and meanings are continuous, predictable non-arbitrary form-meaning relationships may play a central role in the emergence of effective communication systems. (6/8)

But what kind of structure actually helps people communicate better?

Only systematicity (and how well partners’ systems aligned with each other) robustly predicted communicative success. (5/8)

We found that participants developed communication systems that displayed both discreteness (clustering of whistled signals into distinct word-like groups), and systematicity (the signals are predictably organized, in a way that corresponds to what they refer to in the world). (4/8)

After learning five whistle-color pairings as "common ground," they had to generalize this common ground to communicate about 40 colors. This setup lets us look at what kinds of strategies people develop, under communicative pressure. (3/8)

We ran an interactive communication experiment where participants were paired with another partner and used alien whistle sounds — fully continuous pitch contours — to communicate about colors. (2/8)

Yay!