“…Mental mapping in particular has been the most fruitful, with numerous American studies (e.g., Benson, 2003; Blake, Coggshall, Erker, & Taylor, 2008; Bucholtz, Bermudez, Fung, Edwards, & Vargas, 2007; Cramer, 2016; Cramer, Tamasi, & Bounds, 2018; Cukor‐Avila, Jeon, Rector, Tiwari, & Shelton, 2012; Evans, 2011a, 2011b, 2013; Jones, 2015) utilizing various kinds of maps (e.g., full US maps, smaller regional maps, individual state maps) and developing methods beyond the original framework to get a sense of the regional dialects perceived at various levels. This type of approach has also been employed around the globe to describe the views of nonlinguists (e.g., Anders, 2010; Bounds, 2015; Braber, 2014; Cornips, 2018; Coupland, Williams, & Garrett, 1999; Cramer and Montgomery, 2016; Demirci & Kleiner, 1999; Diercks, 2002; Jeon, 2013; Jeon & Cukor‐Avila, 2015; Kuiper, 1999; Lameli, Purschke, & Kehrein, 2008; Long & Yim, 2002; Montgomery, 2007; Romanello, 2002), revealing the importance of place‐based context for understanding the various perceptions, ideologies, and attitudes discovered. This body of work not only emphasizes points made in earlier work on the perceptions of nonlinguists; it provides the groundwork for future work in the field.…”