On the immediacy of phonetic perception

Psychological Science

Volumn 8, Issue 5, 1997, Pages 358-362

  Xu, Yi ^b   Liberman, Alvin M ^a   Whalen, D H ^b  

^a HASKINS LABORATORIES   (United States)

^b NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0347351047     PISSN: 09567976     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.1997.tb00425.x     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. Bailey, P.J., & Herrmann, P. (1993). A reexamination of duplex perception evoked by intensity differences. Perception & Psychophysics, 54, 20-32.
2. Bentin, S., & Mann, V. (1990). Masking and stimulus intensity effects on duplex perception: A confirmation of the dissociation between speech and nonspeech modes. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 88, 64-74.
3. Berkeley, G. (1709). An essay towards a new theory of vision. Dublin: Aaron Rhames.
4. Bregman, A.S. (1990). Auditory scene analysis. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
5. Ciocca, V., & Bregman, A.S. (1989). The effects of auditory streaming on duplex perception. Perception & Psychophysics, 46, 39-48.
6. Diehl, R.L., & Kluender, K.R. (1989). On the objects of speech perception. Ecological Psychology, 1, 121-144.
7. Eimas, P.D., & Miller, J.L. (1992). Organization in the perception of speech by young infants. Psychological Science, 3, 340-345.
8. Fowler, C.A. (1991). Auditory perception is not special: We see the world, we feel the world, we hear the world. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 89, 2910-2915.
9. Fowler, C.A., & Rosenblum, L.D. (1991). The perception of phonetic gestures. In I.G. Mattingly & M. Studdert-Kennedy (Eds.) Modularity and the motor theory of speech perception (pp. 33-59). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
10. Liberman, A.M. (1996). Speech: A special code. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
11. Liberman, A.M., Cooper, F.S., Shankweiler, D.P., & Studdert-Kennedy, M. (1967). Perception of the speech code. Psychological Review, 74, 431-461.
12. Liberman, A.M., & Mattingly, I.G. (1985). The motor theory of speech perception revised. Cognition, 21, 1-36.
13. Liberman, A.M., & Mattingly, I.G. (1989). A specialization for speech perception. Science, 243, 489-494.
14. Mann, V.A., & Liberman, A.M. (1983). Some differences between phonetic and auditory modes of perception. Cognition, 14, 211-235.
15. Massaro, D.W., & Oden, G.C. (1980). Evaluation and integration of acoustic features in speech perception. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 67, 996-1013.
16. Mattingly, I.G., & Liberman, A.M. (1988). Specialized perceiving systems for speech and other biologically significant sounds. In G.M. Edelman, W.E. Gall, & W.M. Cowan (Eds.), Auditory function (pp. 775-793). New York: John Wiley & Sons.
17. Mattingly, I.G., & Liberman, A.M. (1990). Speech and other auditory modules. In G.M. Edelman, W.E. Gall, & W.M. Cowan (Eds.), Signal and sense: Local and global order in perceptual maps (pp. 501-519). New York: John Wiley & Sons.
18. Nygaard, L.C., & Eimas, P.D. (1990). A new version of duplex perception: Evidence for phonetic and nonphonetic fusion. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 88, 75-86.
19. Remez, R.E., Rubin, P.E., Berns, S.M., Pardo, J.S., & Lang, J.M. (1994). On the perceptual organization of speech. Psychological Review, 101, 129-156.
20. Richards, W. (1971). Anomalous stereoscopic depth perception. Journal of the Optical Society of America, 61, 410-414.
21. Stevens, K.N., & Blumstein, S.E. (1981). The search for invariant acoustic correlates of phonetic features. In P.D. Eimas & J.L. Miller (Eds.), Perspectives on the study of speech (pp. 1-38). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
22. Vorperian, H.K., Ochs, M.T., & Grantham, D.W. (1995). Stimulus intensity and fundamental frequency effects on duplex perception. Joumal of the Acoustical Society of America, 98, 735-744.
23. Whalen, D.H. (1981). Effects of vocalic formant transitions and vowel quality on the English [s]-[∫] boundary. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 69, 275-282.
24. Whalen, D.H. (1984). Subcategorical phonetic mismatches slow phonetic judgments. Perception & Psychophysics, 35, 49-64.
25. Whalen, D.H. (1989). Vowel and consonant judgments are not independent when cued by the same information. Perception & Psychophysics, 46, 284-292.
26. Whalen, D.H., & Liberman, A.M. (1987). Speech perception takes precedence over non-speech perception. Science, 237, 169-171.
27. Whalen, D.H., & Liberman, A.M. (1996). Limits on phonetic integration in duplex perception. Perception & Psychophysics, 58, 857-870.