Modeling the word recognition data of Vitevitch and Luce (1998): Is it ARTful?

Psychonomic Bulletin and Review

Volumn 14, Issue 3, 2007, Pages 442-448

  Pitt, Mark A ^a   Myung, Jay I ^a   Altteri, Nicholas ^a  

^a OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 34548297922     PISSN: 10699384     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3758/BF03194086     Document Type: Review

References (19)

1. EISNER, F., & MCQUEEN, J. M. (2005). The specificity of perceptual learning in speech processing. Perception & Psychophysics, 67, 224-238.
2. GASKELL, M. G., & MARSLEN-WILSON, W. D. (2002). Representation and competition in the perception of spoken words. Cognitive Psychology, 45, 220-266.
3. GROSSBERG, S. (1986). The adaptive self-organization of serial order in behavior: Speech, language, and motor control. In E. C. Schwab & H. C. Nusbaum (Eds.), Pattern recognition by humans and machines: Vol. 1. Speech perception (pp. 187-294). Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
4. GROSSBERG, S., BOARDMAN, I., COHEN, M. (1997). Neural dynamics of variable-rate speech categorization. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 23, 481-503.
5. JOHANSEN, M. K., & PALMERI, T. J. (2002). Are there representational shifts during category learning? Cognitive Psychology, 45, 482-553.
6. KLATT, D. H. (1980). Speech perception: A model of acoustic-phonetic analysis and lexical access. In R. A. Cole (Ed.), Perception and production of fluent speech (pp. 243-288). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
7. KUCERA, H., & FRANCIS, W. N. (1967). Computational analysis of presentday American English. Providence, RI: Brown University Press.
8. LIPINSKI, J., & GUPTA, P. (2005). Does neighborhood density influence repetition latency for non words? Separating the effects of density and duration. Journal of Memory & Language, 52, 171-192.
9. LUCE, P. A., GOLDINGER, S. D., AUER, E. T., JR., & VITEVITCH, M. S. (2000). Phonetic priming, neighborhood activation, and PARSYN. Perception & Psychophysics, 62, 615-625.
10. LUCE, P. A., & PISONI, D. B. (1998). Recognizing spoken words: The neighborhood activation model. Ear & Hearing, 19, 1-36.
11. MCCLELLAND, J. L., & ELMAN, J. L. (1986). The TRACE model of speech perception. Cognitive Psychology, 18, 1-86.
12. NORRIS, D. (1994). Shortlist: A connectionist model of continuous speech recognition. Cognition, 52, 189-234.
13. NORRIS, D., MCQUEEN, J. M., & CUTLER, A. (2000). Merging information in speech recognition: Feedback is never necessary. Behavioral & Brain Sciences, 23, 299-325.
14. NORRIS, D., MCQUEEN, J. M., & CUTLER, A. (2003). Perceptual learning in speech. Cognitive Psychology, 47, 204-238.
15. PITT, M. A., KIM, W., NAVARRO, D. J., & MYUNG, J. I. (2006). Global model analysis by parameter space partitioning. Psychological Review, 113, 57-83.
16. VITEVITCH, M. S., & LUCE, P. A. (1998). When words compete: Levels of processing in perception of spoken words. Psychological Science, 9, 325-329.
17. VITEVITCH, M. S., & LUCE, P. A. (1999). Probabilistic phonotactics and neighborhood activation in spoken word recognition. Journal of Memory & Language, 40, 374-408.
18. VITEVITCH, M. S., & LUCE, P. A. (2004). A Web-based interface to calculate phonotactic probability for words and nonwords in English. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 36, 481-487.
19. VITEVITCH, M. S., & LUCE, P. A. (2005). Increases in phonotactic probability facilitate spoken nonword repetition. Journal of Memory & Language, 52, 193-204.