The effect of voice onset time differences on lexical access in Dutch

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance

Volumn 32, Issue 1, 2006, Pages 178-196

  Van Alphen, Petra M ^a,b   McQueen, James M ^a  

^a MAX PLANCK INSTITUTE FOR PSYCHOLINGUISTICS   (Netherlands)

^b UNIVERSITY OF AMSTERDAM   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Cross modal identity priming; Dutch plosives; Relevance of phonetic detail; Spoken word recognition; Voice onset time (VOT)

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; ATTENTION; DECISION MAKING; HUMAN; PAIRED ASSOCIATE LEARNING; PATTERN RECOGNITION; PHONETICS; READING; RECALL; SEMANTICS; SPEECH; SPEECH PERCEPTION;

ATTENTION; DECISION MAKING; HUMANS; MENTAL RECALL; PAIRED-ASSOCIATE LEARNING; PATTERN RECOGNITION, VISUAL; PHONETICS; READING; SEMANTICS; SPEECH ACOUSTICS; SPEECH PERCEPTION;

EID: 33244454981     PISSN: 00961523     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/0096-1523.32.1.178     Document Type: Article

References (47)

1. Andruski, J. E., Blumstein, S. E., & Burton, M. (1994). The effect of subphonetic differences on lexical access. Cognition, 52, 163-187.
2. Baayen, H., Piepenbrock, R., & Gulikers, L. (1995). The CELEX lexical database [CD-ROM]. Philadelphia: Linguistic Data Consortium, University of Pennsylvania.
3. Connine, C. M., Blasko, D. G., & Titone, D. (1993). Do the beginnings of spoken words have a special status in auditory word recognition? Journal of Memory and Language, 32, 193-210.
4. Connine, C. M., Titone, D., Deelman, T., & Blasko, D. (1997). Similarity mapping in spoken word recognition. Journal of Memory and Language, 37, 463-480.
5. Cutler, A., van Ooijen, B., & Norris, D. (1999). Vowels, consonants and lexical activation. In J. J. Ohala, Y. Hasegawa, M. Ohala, D. Granville, & A. C. Bailey (Eds.), Proceedings of the 14th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences (Vol. 3, pp. 2053-2056). Berkeley: University of California.
6. Dahan, D., Magnuson, J. S., Tanenhaus, M. K., & Hogan, E. M. (2001). Subcategorical mismatches and the time course of lexical access: Evidence for lexical competition. Language and Cognitive Processes, 16, 507-534.
7. Davis, M. H., Marslen-Wilson, W. D., & Gaskell, M. G. (2002). Leading up the lexical garden-path: Segmentation and ambiguity in spoken word recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 28, 218-244.
8. Docherty, G. J. (1992). The timing of voicing in English obstruents. Berlin, Germany: Foris Publications.
9. Frauenfelder, U. H., Scholten, M., & Content, A. (2001). Bottom-up inhibition in lexical selection: Phonological mismatch effects in spoken word recognition. Language and Cognitive Processes, 16, 583-607.
10. Goldinger, S. D. (1996). Words and voices: Episodic traces in spoken word identification and recognition memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 22, 1166-1183.
11. Gow, D. W. (2002). Does English coronal place assimilation create lexical ambiguity? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 28, 163-179.
12. Gow, D. W., & Gordon, P. C. (1995). Lexical and prelexical influences on word segmentation: Evidence from priming. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 21, 344-359.
13. Green, K. P., & Miller, J. L. (1985). On the role of visual rate information in phonetic perception. Perception & Psychophysics, 38, 269-276.
14. Keating, P. A., Mikos, M. J., & Ganong, W. F. (1981). A cross-language study of range of voice onset time in the perception of initial stop voicing. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 70, 1261-1271.
15. Keppel, G. (1982). Design and analysis: A researcher's handbook. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
16. Liberman, A. M., Harris, K. S., Eimas, P., Lisker, L., & Bastian, J. (1961). An effect of learning on speech perception: The discrimination of durations of silence with and without phonemic significance. Language and Speech, 4, 175-195.
17. Lisker, L., & Abramson, A. S. (1970). The voicing dimension: Some experiments in comparative phonetics. In Proceedings of the Sixth International Congress of Phonetic Sciences (pp. 563-567). Prague, Czech Republic: Academia.
18. Lotz, J., Abramson, A. S., Gerstman, L. J., Ingemann, F., & Nemser, W. J. (1960). The perception of stops by speakers of English, Spanish, Hungarian, and Thai: A tape-cutting experiment. Language and Speech, 3, 71-76.
19. Macmillan, N. A., & Creelman, C. D. (1991). Detection theory: A user's guide. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
20. Marslen-Wilson, W., Moss, H. E., & van Halen, S. (1996). Perceptual distance and competition in lexical access. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 22, 1376-1392.
21. Marslen-Wilson, W. D., Nix, A., & Gaskell, M. G. (1995). Phonological variation in lexical access: Abstractness, inference and English place assimilation. Language and Cognitive Processes, 10, 285-308.
22. Marslen-Wilson, W., & Warren, P. (1994). Levels of perceptual representation and process in lexical access: Words, phonemes, and features. Psychological Review, 101, 653-675.
23. Marslen-Wilson, W., & Zwitserlood, P. (1989). Accessing spoken words: On the importance of word onsets. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 15, 576-585.
24. McMurray, B., Tanenhaus, M. K., & Aslin, R. N. (2002). Gradient effects of within-category phonetic variation on lexical access. Cognition, 86, B33-B42.
25. McQueen, J. M. (2005). Speech perception. In K. Lamberts & R. Goldstone (Eds.), The handbook of cognition (pp. 255-275). London: Sage.
26. McQueen, J. M., Norris, D., & Cutler, A. (1999). Lexical influence in phonetic decision making: Evidence from subcategorical mismatches. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 25, 1363-1389.
27. Milberg, W., Blumstein, S., & Dworetzky, B. (1988). Phonological factors in lexical access: Evidence from an auditory lexical decision task. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 26, 305-308.
28. Miller, J. L. (1981). Effects of speaking rate on segmental distinctions. In P. D. Eimas & J. L. Miller (Eds.), Perspectives on the study of speech (pp. 39-74). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
29. Miller, J. L., & Liberman, A. M. (1979). Some effects of later-occurring information on the perception of stop consonant and semivowel. Perception & Psychophysics, 25, 457-465.
30. Miller, J. L., & Volaitis, L. E. (1989). Effects of speaking rate on the perceived internal structure of phonetic categories. Perception & Psychophysics, 46, 505-512.
31. Radeau, M., Segui, J., & Morais, J. (1994). The effect of overlap position in phonological priming between spoken words. In Proceedings of the 1994 International Conference on Spoken Language Processing (Vol. 3, pp. 1419-1422). Yokohama, Japan: Acoustical Society of Japan.
32. Repp, B. H., & Liberman, A. M. (1987). Phonetic category boundaries are flexible. In S. R. Harnad (Ed.), Categorical perception (pp. 89-112). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
33. Salverda, A. P., Dahan, D., & McQueen, J. M. (2003). The role of prosodic boundaries in the resolution of lexical embedding in speech comprehension. Cognition, 90, 51-89.
34. Shatzman, K. B., & McQueen, J. M. (in press). Segment duration as a cue to word boundaries in spoken-word recognition. Perception & Psychophysics.
35. Slowiaczek, L. M., McQueen, J. M., Soltano, E. G., & Lynch, M. (2000). Phonological representations in prelexical speech processing: Evidence from form-based priming. Journal of Memory and Language, 43, 530-560.
36. Smith, B. (1978). Effects of place of articulation and vowel environment on voiced stop consonant production. Glossa, 12, 163-175.
37. Spinelli, E., McQueen, J. M., & Cutler, A. (2003). Processing resyllabified words in French. Journal of Memory and Language, 48, 233-254.
38. Streeter, L. A., & Nigro, G. N. (1979). The role of medial consonant transitions in word perception. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 65, 1533-1541.
39. Studebaker, G. A. (1985). A "rationalized" arcsine transform. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 28, 455-462.
40. Summerfield, A. Q. (1981). Articulatory rate and perceptual constancy in phonetic perception. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 7, 1074-1095.
41. Tabossi, P., Collina, S., Mazzetti, M., & Zoppello, M. (2000). Syllables in the processing of spoken Italian. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 26, 758-775.
42. Utman, J. A., Blumstein, S. E., & Burton, M. W. (2000). Effects of subphonetic and syllable structure variation on word recognition. Perception & Psychophysics, 62, 1297-1311.
43. van Alphen, P. M. (2000). Does subcategorical variation influence lexical access? In A. Cutler, J. McQueen, & R. Zondervan (Eds.), Proceedings of SWAP: Workshop on Spoken Word Access Processes (pp. 55-58). Nijmegen, the Netherlands: MPI for Psycholinguistics.
44. van Alphen, P. M., & Smits, R. (2004). Acoustical and perceptual analysis of the voicing distinction in Dutch initial plosives: The role of prevoicing. Journal of Phonetics, 32, 455-491.
45. van der Lugt, A. (1999). From speech to words (MPI Series in Psycholinguistics No. 13). Doctoral dissertation, University of Nijmegen, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
46. Whalen, D. H. (1984). Subcategorical phonetic mismatches slow phonetic judgments. Perception & Psychophysics, 35, 49-64.
47. Whalen, D. H. (1991). Subcategorical phonetic mismatches and lexical access. Perception & Psychophysics, 50, 351-360.