Use of speech-modulated noise adds strong "bottom-up" cues for phonemic restoration

Perception and Psychophysics

Volumn 58, Issue 3, 1996, Pages 342-350

  Bashford Jr , James A ^a   Warren, Richard M ^a   Brown, Christopher A ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN MILWAUKEE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; ASSOCIATION; ATTENTION; HUMAN; NOISE; PERCEPTION; PHONETICS; PSYCHOPHYSICS; SOUND DETECTION; SPEECH; SPEECH INTELLIGIBILITY; SPEECH PERCEPTION;

ATTENTION; CUES; HUMANS; NOISE; PERCEPTUAL MASKING; PHONETICS; PSYCHOACOUSTICS; SOUND SPECTROGRAPHY; SPEECH ACOUSTICS; SPEECH INTELLIGIBILITY; SPEECH PERCEPTION;

EID: 0030115027     PISSN: 00315117     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3758/BF03206810     Document Type: Article

References (60)

1. AMERICAN NATIONAL STANDARDS INSTITUTE (1971). USA standard method for measurement of monosyllabic word intelligibility [ANSI-S3.2, 1960 (R1971)]. New York: Author.
2. BASHFORD, J. A., JR., MEYERS, M. D., BRUBAKER, B. S., & WARREN, R. M. (1988). Illusory continuity of interrupted speech: Speech rate determines durational limits. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 84, 1635-1638.
3. BASHFORD, J. A., JR., RIENER, K. R., & WARREN, R. M. (1992). Increasing the intelligibility of speech through multiple phonemic restorations. Perception & Psychophysics, 51, 211-217.
4. BASHFORD, J. A., JR., & WARREN, R. M. (1979). Perceptual synthesis of deleted phonemes. In J. J. Wolf & D. H. Klatt (Eds.), Speech communication papers (pp. 423-426). New York: Acoustical Society of America.
5. BASHFORD, J. A., JR., & WARREN, R. M. (1987a). Effects of spectral alternation on the intelligibility of words and sentences. Perception & Psychophysics, 42, 431-438.
6. BASHFORD, J. A., JR., & WARREN, R. M. (1987b). Multiple phonemic restorations follow the rules for auditory induction. Perception & Psychophysics, 42, 114-121.
7. BECK, W. G., & SPEAKS, C. S. (1993). Intelligibility of selected passages from the speech intelligibility rating (SIR) test. Journal of Speech & Hearing Research, 36, 1075-1082.
8. BLAMEY, P. J., MARTIN, L. F. A., & CLARK, G. M. (1985). A comparison of three speech coding strategies using an acoustic model of a cochlear implant. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 77, 209-217.
9. BREEUWER, M., & PLOMP, R. (1984). Speechreading supplemented with frequency-selective sound-pressure information. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 76, 686-691.
10. BREEUWER, M., & PLOMP, R. (1986). Speechreading supplemented with auditorily presented speech parameters. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 79, 481-499.
11. CHERRY, E., & WILEY, R. (1967). Speech communications in very noisy environments. Nature, 214, 1164.
12. CIOCCA, V., & BREGMAN, A. S. (1987). Perceived continuity of gliding and steady-state tones through interrupting noise. Perception & Psychophysics, 42, 476-484.
13. DANNENBRING, G. L. (1976). Perceived auditory continuity with alternately rising and falling frequency transitions. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 30, 99-114.
14. DEWITT, L. A., & SAMUEL, A. G. (1990). The role of knowledge-based expectations in music perception: Evidence from musical restoration. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 119, 123-144.
15. DIRKS, D. D., & BOWER, D. (1970). Effect of forward and backward masking on speech intelligibility. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 47, 1003-1007.
16. ERBER, N. P. (1972). Speech-envelope cues as an acoustic aid to lipreading for profoundly deaf children. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 51, 1224-1227.
17. ERBER, N. P. (1979). Speech perception by profoundly hearing-impaired children. Journal of Speech & Hearing Disorders, 44, 255-270.
18. FESTEN, J. M., & PLOMP, R. (1990). Effects of fluctuating noise and interfering speech on the speech reception threshold for impaired and normal hearing. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 88, 1725-1736.
19. FROST, R. (1991). Phonetic recoding of print and its effect on the detection of concurrent speech in amplitude-modulated noise. Cognition, 39, 195-214.
20. FROST, R., REPP, B. H., & KATZ, L. (1988). Can speech perception be influenced by simultaneous presentation of print? Journal of Memory & Language, 27, 741-755.
21. GORDON, P. C. (1988). Induction of rate-dependent processing by coarse-grained aspects of speech. Perception & Psychophysics, 43, 137-146.
22. GRANT, K. W., ARDELL, L. H., KUHL, P. K., & SPARKS, D. W. (1985). The contribution of fundamental frequency, amplitude envelope, and voicing duration cues to speechreading in normal-hearing subjects. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 77, 671-677.
23. GRANT, K. W., BRAIDA, L. D., & RENN, R. J. (1991). Single band amplitude envelope cues as an aid to speechreading. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 43A, 621-645.
24. GRANT, K. W., BRAIDA, L. D., & RENN, R. J. (1994). Auditory supplements to speechreading: Combining amplitude envelope cues from different spectral regions of speech. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 95, 1065-1073.
25. HAYS, W. L. (1988). Statistics. Chicago: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
26. HOLLOWAY, C. M. (1970). Passing the strongly voiced components of noisy speech. Nature, 226, 178-179.
27. HORII, Y., HOUSE, A. S., & HUGHES, G. W. (1971). A masking noise with speech-envelope characteristics for studying intelligibility. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 49, 1849-1856.
28. HOUTGAST, T. (1972). Psychophysical evidence for lateral inhibition in hearing. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 51, 1885-1894.
29. KALIKOW, D. N., STEVENS, K. N., & ELLIOTT, L. L. (1977). Development of a test of speech intelligibility in noise using sentence materials with controlled word predictability. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 61, 1337-1351.
30. KLUENDER, K. R., & JENISON, R. L. (1992). Effects of glide slope, noise intensity, and noise duration on the extrapolation of FM glides through noise. Perception & Psychophysics, 51, 231-238.
31. LAYTON, B. (1975). Differential effects of two nonspeech sounds on phonemic restoration. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 6, 487-490.
32. LEMAY, D. G., & BRAIDA, L. D. (1994). Band-envelope speechreading supplements derived from noisy speech [Abstract]. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 95, 3014.
33. MILLER, G. A., & LICKLIDER, J. C. R. (1950). The intelligibility of interrupted speech. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 22, 167-173.
34. POWERS, G. L., & WILCOX, J. C. (1977). Intelligibility of temporally interrupted speech with and without intervening noise. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 61, 195-199.
35. REMEZ, R. E., & RUBIN, P. E. (1990). On the perception of speech from time-varying acoustic information: Contributions of amplitude variation. Perception & Psychophysics, 48, 313-325.
36. REPP, B. H. (1992). Perceptual restoration of a "missing" speech sound: Auditory induction or illusion? Perception & Psychophysics, 51, 14-32.
37. REPP, B. H., FROST, R., & ZSIGA, E. (1992). Lexical mediation between sight and sound in speechreading. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 45A, 1-20.
38. ROSEN, S. (1992). Temporal information in speech: Acoustic, auditory and linguistic aspects. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, 336, 367-373.
39. SALASOO, A., & PISONI, D. B. (1985). Interaction of knowledge sources in spoken word identification. Journal of Memory & Language, 24, 210-231.
40. SAMUEL, A. G. (1981a). Phonemic restoration: Insights from a new methodology. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 110, 474-494.
41. SAMUEL, A. G. (1981b). The role of bottom-up confirmation in the phonemic restoration illusion. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 7, 1124-1131.
42. SAMUEL, A. G. (1987). Lexical uniqueness effects on phonemic restoration. Journal of Memory & Language, 26, 36-56.
43. SAMUEL, A. G. (1991). A further examination of attentional effects in the phonemic restoration illusion. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 43A, 679-699.
44. SAMUEL, A. G., & RESSLER, W. H. (1986). Attention within auditory word perception: Insights from the phonemic restoration illusion. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 12, 70-79.
45. SASAKI, T. (1980). Sound restoration and temporal localization of noise in speech and music sounds. Tohuku Psychologica Folia, 39, 79-88.
46. SCHROEDER, M. R. (1968). Reference signal for signal quality studies. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 44, 1735-1736.
47. SILVERMAN, S. R., & HIRSH, I. J. (1955). Problems related to the use of speech in clinical audiometry. Annals of Otology, Rhinology, & Laryngology, 64, 1234-1245.
48. THURLOW, W. R. (1957). An auditory figure-ground effect. American Journal of Psychology, 70, 653-654.
49. TROUT, J. D., & POSER, W. J. (1990). Auditory and visual influences on phonemic restoration. Language & Speech, 33, 121-135.
50. VAN TASELL, D. J., SOLI, S. D., KIRBY, V. M., & WIDIN, G. P. (1987). Speech waveform envelope cues for consonant recognition. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 82, 1152-1161.
51. VERSCHUURE, J. (1978). Auditory excitation patterns: The significance of the pulsation threshold method for the measurement of auditory nonlinearity. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Erasmus University, Rotterdam.
52. VERSCHUURE, J., & BROCAAR, M. P. (1983). Intelligibility of interrupted meaningful and nonsense speech with and without intervening noise. Perception & Psychophysics, 33, 232-240.
53. WALLEY, A. C. (1988). Spoken word recognition by young children and adults. Cognitive Development, 3, 137-165.
54. WARREN, R. M. (1970). Perceptual restoration of missing speech sounds. Science, 167, 392-393.
55. WARREN, R. M. (1982). Auditory perception: A new synthesis. New York: Pergamon.
56. WARREN, R. M. (1984). Perceptual restoration of obliterated sounds. Psychological Bulletin, 96, 371-383.
57. WARREN, R. M., BASHFORD, J. A., JR., HEALY, E. W., & BRUBAKER, B. S. (1994). Auditory induction: Reciprocal changes in alternating sounds. Perception & Psychophysics, 55, 313-322.
58. WARREN, R. M., & OBUSEK, C. J. (1971). Speech perception and phonemic restorations. Perception & Psychophysics, 9, 358-362.
59. WARREN, R. M., OBUSEK, C., & ACKROFF, J. M. (1972). Auditory induction: Perceptual synthesis of absent sounds. Science, 176, 1149-1151.
60. WARREN, R. M., & SHERMAN, G. L. (1974). Phonemic restorations based on subsequent context. Perception & Psychophysics, 16, 150-156.