Audiovisual perception of openness and lip rounding in front vowels

Journal of Phonetics

Volumn 35, Issue 2, 2007, Pages 244-258

  Traunmüller, Hartmut ^a   Öhrström, Niklas ^a  

^a STOCKHOLM UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 33847068653     PISSN: 00954470     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.wocn.2006.03.002     Document Type: Article

References (41)

1. Aaltonen O. The effect of relative amplitude levels of F2 and F3 on the categorization of synthetic vowels. Journal of Phonetics 13 (1985) 1-9
2. Aloufy S., Lapidot M., and Myslobodsky M. Differences in susceptibility to the "blending illusion" among native Hebrew and English speakers. Brain and Language 53 (1996) 51-57
3. Amcoff, S. (1970). Visuell perception av talljud och avläsestöd för hörselskadade [Visual perception of speech sounds and speech reading support for the hard of hearing]. Rep. 7, Lärarhögskolan, Pedagogiska institutionen, Uppsala.
4. Andersen, T. S. (2005). Model-based assessment of factors influencing categorical audiovisual perception. Doctoral dissertation, Helsinki University of Technology. http://lib.tkk.fi/Diss/2005/isbn9512275481/
5. Argyle M., and Cook M. Gaze and mutual gaze (1976), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
6. Argyle M., and Ingham R. Gaze, mutual gaze, and proximity. Semiotica 6 (1972) 32-49
7. Eklund I., and Traunmüller H. Comparative study of male and female whispered and phonated versions of the long vowels of Swedish. Phonetica 54 (1997) 1-21
8. Erber N.P. Interaction of audition and vision in the recognition of oral speech stimuli. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research 12 (1969) 423-425
9. Fant G. Analysis and synthesis of speech processes. In: Malmberg B. (Ed). Manual of phonetics (1968), North-Holland Publishing Company, Amsterdam 173-277
10. Gagné J.P., Masterson V., Munhall K.G., Bilida N., and Querengesser C. Across talker variablility in auditory, visual, and audiovisual speech intelligibility for conversational and clear speech. Journal of the Academy of Rehabilitative Audiology 27 (1994) 135-158
11. Green K.P. The use of auditory and visual information in phonetic perception. In: Stork D.G., and Hennecke M.E. (Eds). Speech reading by humans and machines: Models, systems, and applications (1996), Springer, Berlin 55-77
12. Green K.P., and Gerdeman A. Cross-modal discrepancies in coarticulation and the integration of speech information: The McGurk effect with mismatched vowels. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 21 (1995) 1409-1426
13. Green K.P., Kuhl P.K., and Meltzoff A.N. Integrating speech information across talkers, gender, and sensory modality: Female faces and male voices in the McGurk effect. Perception & Psychophysics 50 (1991) 524-536
14. Hayashi, T., & Sekiyama, K. (1998). Native-foreign language effect in the McGurk effect: A test with Chinese and Japanese. In The Proceedings of the AVSP'98 (pp. 61-66). Terrigal, Australia.
15. Hietanen J.K., Manninen P., Sams M., and Surakka V. Does audiovisual speech perception use information about facial configuration?. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology 13 (2001) 395-407
16. Irwin, J. R., Whalen, D. H., & Fowler, C. A. A sex difference in visual influence on heard speech. Perception & Psychophysics, in press.
17. Johnson F.M., Hicks L., Goldberg T., and Myslobodsky M. Sex differences in lipreading. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society 26 (1988) 106-108
18. Johnson K., Strand E.A., and D'Imperio M. Auditory-visual integration of talker gender in vowel perception. Journal of Phonetics 27 (1999) 359-384
19. Kricos P.B. Differences in visual intelligibility across talkers. In: Stork D.G., and Hennecke M.E. (Eds). Speechreading by humans and machines: Models, systems, and applications (1996), Springer, Berlin 43-53
20. Leeb R.T., and Rejskind F.G. Here's looking at you, kid! A longitudinal study of perceived gender differences in mutual gaze behavior in young infants. Sex Roles 50 (2004) 1-14
21. Lisker L., and Rossi M. Auditory and visual cueing of the [± rounded] feature of vowels. Language and Speech 35 (1992) 391-417
22. Mantakas, M., Schwartz, J.-L., & Escudier, P. (1988). An acoustic-perceptual study of the rounding opposition in French front vowels. Bulletin du Laboratoire de la Communication Parlée, A2: 95-130. Institut de la Communication Parlée, Grenoble, France.
23. Massaro D.W., and Stork D.G. Speech recognition and sensory integration. American Scientist 86 (1998) 236-244
24. McGurk H., and MacDonald J. Hearing lips and seeing voices. Nature 264 (1976) 746-748
25. McLeod A., and Summerfield A.Q. Quantifying the contribution of vision to speech perception in noise. British Journal of Audiology 21 (1987) 131-141
26. Möttönen, R. (2004). Cortical mechanisms of seeing and hearing speech. Doctoral dissertation, University of Technology, Helsinki. http://lib.hut.fi/Diss/2004/isbn9512274272/
27. Öhrström, N., & Traunmüller, H. (2004). Audiovisuell perception av vokaler/Audiovisuelle Wahrnehmung von Vokalen/Perception audiovisuelle de voyelles (Demonstration): http://www.ling.su.se/fon/fonetik_2004/saima_0.html
28. Risberg, A., & Agelfors, E. (1978). Information extraction and information processing in speech-reading. In STL-QPSR 2-3/1978 (pp. 62-82). Department of Speech Transmission and Musical Acoustics, Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm.
29. Robert-Ribes J., Schwartz J.-L., Lallouache T., and Escudier P. Complementarity and synergy in bimodal speech: Auditory, visual and audio-visual identification of French oral vowels in noise. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 103 (1998) 3677-3689
30. Rosenblum L.D., and Saldaña H.M. An audiovisual test of kinematic primitives for visual speech perception. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 22 (1996) 318-331
31. Sams M., Aulanko R., Hämäläinen M., Hari R., Lounasmaa O.V., Lu S.-T., et al. Seeing speech: Visual information from lip movements modifies activity in the human auditory cortex. Neuroscience Letters 127 (1991) 141-145
32. Schwartz J.-L., Robert-Ribes J., and Escudier P. Ten years after Summerfield: A taxonomy of models for audio-visual fusion in speech perception. In: Campbell R. (Ed). Hearing by eye: The psychology of lipreading (1998), Erlbaum, Hove, UK 3-51
33. Sekiyama K. Cultural and linguistic factors in audiovisual speech processing: The McGurk effect in Chinese subjects. Perception & Psychophysics 59 (1997) 73-80
34. Sekiyama K., and Tohkura Y. McGurk effect in non-English listeners: Few visual effects for Japanese subjects hearing Japanese syllables of high auditory intelligibility. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 90 (1991) 1797-1805
35. Sekiyama K., and Tohkura Y. Inter-language differences in the influence of visual cues in speech perception. Journal of Phonetics 21 (1993) 427-444
36. Shams L., Kamitani Y., and Shimojo S. What you see is what you hear. Nature 408 (2000) 788
37. Sumby W.H., and Pollack I. Visual contribution to speech intelligibility in noise. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 26 (1954) 212-215
38. Summerfield A.Q., and McGrath M. Detection and resolution of audio-visual incompatibility in the perception of vowels. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology A36 (1984) 51-74
39. Traunmüller H. Lippenrundung bei schwedischen Vokalen [Lip rounding in Swedish vowels]. Phonetica 36 (1979) 44-56
40. Wada Y., Kitagawa N., and Noguchi K. Audio-visual integration in temporal perception. International Journal of Psychophysiology 50 (2003) 117-124
41. Welch R.B., and Warren D.H. Immediate perceptual response to intersensory discrepancy. Psychological Bulletin 88 (1980) 638-667