Is speech perception modular or interactive?

Trends in Cognitive Sciences

Volumn 8, Issue 1, 2004, Pages 3-5

  Bowers, Jeffrey S ^a   Davis, Colin J ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BRISTOL   (United Kingdom)

^b MACQUARIE UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

AUDITION; FEEDBACK; LEARNING SYSTEMS; SPEECH PROCESSING;

PHONEME LEARNING; SPEECH PERCEPTION;

COGNITIVE SYSTEMS;

ALGORITHM; COGNITION; FEEDBACK SYSTEM; HUMAN; LEARNING; PARSIMONY ANALYSIS; PHONEME; PHONETICS; REVIEW; SPEECH ARTICULATION; SPEECH PERCEPTION;

EID: 0345731223     PISSN: 13646613     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.tics.2003.10.018     Document Type: Short Survey

References (18)

1. Norris D., et al. Merging information in speech recognition: feedback is never necessary. Behav. Brain Sci. 23:2000;299-370.
2. Norris D., et al. Perceptual learning in speech. Cogn. Psychol. 47:2003;204-238.
3. Fodor J.A. Modularity of Mind: An Essay on Faculty Psychology. 1983;MIT Press.
4. Grossberg S., Myers C.W. The resonant dynamics of speech perception: interword integration and duration-dependent backward effects. Psychol. Rev. 107:2000;735-767.
5. McClelland J.L. The case for interactionism in language processing. Attention Perform. 12:1987;3-36.
6. Samuel A.G. Phonemic restoration: insights from a new methodology. J. Exp. Psychol. Gen. 110:1981;474-494.
7. Ganong W.F. Phonetic categorization in auditory word perception. J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 6:1980;110-125.
8. Gaskell M.G., Marslen-Wilson W.D. Mechanisms of phonological inference in speech perception. J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 24:1998;380-396.
9. Clarke C.M. Perceptual adjustment to foreign-accented English with short-term exposure. Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Spoken Langauge Processing. Vol. 1:2002;Casual Productions, Ltd. pp. 253-256.
10. Rumelhart S., et al. Learning representations by back-propagating errors. Nature. 323:1986;533-536.
11. Crick F.H.C. The recent excitement about neural networks. Nature. 337:1989;129-132.
12. Zipser D., Andersen R.A. A backpropagation programmed network that simulates response properties of a subset of posterior parietal neurons. Nature. 331:1988;679-684.
13. O'Reilly R.C. Biologically plausible error-driven learning using local activation differences: the generalized recirculation algorithm. Neural Comput. 8:1996;895-938.
14. Bowers J.S. Challenging the widespread assumption that connectionism and distributed representations go hand-in-hand. Cogn. Psychol. 45:2002;413-445.
15. McClosky M., Cohen N.J. Catastrophic interference in connectionist networks: the sequential learning problem. Bower G.H. The Psychology of Learning and Motivation. 1989;109-165 Academic Press.
16. Grossberg S. Competitive learning: from interactive activation to adaptive resonance. Cogn. Sci. 11:1987;23-63.
17. Norris D. How to build a connectionist idiot (savant). Cognition. 35:1990;277-291.
18. Carpenter G.A., Grossberg S. A massively parallel architecture for a self-organizing neural pattern recognition machine. Comput. Vis. Graphics Image Process. 37:1987;54-115.