The abstract representations in speech processing

Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology

Volumn 61, Issue 11, 2008, Pages 1601-1619

  Cutler, Anne ^a,b  

^a MAX PLANCK INSTITUTE FOR PSYCHOLINGUISTICS   (Netherlands)

^b UNIVERSITY OF WESTERN SYDNEY   (Australia)

Author keywords

Lexicon; Phonemes; Representations; Speech processing

Indexed keywords

ART; CONCEPT FORMATION; CONFERENCE PAPER; HUMAN; LANGUAGE; PSYCHOLOGICAL MODEL; RECOGNITION; SPEECH;

CONCEPT FORMATION; HUMANS; LANGUAGE; MODELS, PSYCHOLOGICAL; PORTRAITS AS TOPIC; RECOGNITION (PSYCHOLOGY); SPEECH;

EID: 54549120434     PISSN: 17470218     EISSN: 17470226     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/13803390802218542     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (60)

1. Arnold, K., & Zuberbühler, K. (2006). Language evolution: Semantic combinations in primate calls. Nature, 441, 303.
2. Bertelson, P., Vroomen, J., & de Gelder, B. (2003). Visual recalibration of auditory speech identification: A McGurk aftereffect. Psychological Science, 14, 592-597.
3. Best, C. T. (1995). A direct realist perspective on cross-language speech perception. In W. Strange (Ed.), Speech perception and linguistic experience: Theoretical and methodological issues in cross-language speech research (pp. 167-200). Timonium, MD: York Press.
4. Cooper, N., Cutler, A., & Wales, R. (2002). Constraints of lexical stress on lexical access in English: Evidence from native and non-native listeners. Language and Speech, 45, 207-228.
5. Costa, A., Cutler, A., & Sebastián-Gallés, N. (1998). Effects of phoneme repertoire on phoneme decision. Perception & Psychophysics, 60, 1022-1031.
6. Cutler, A., Eisner, F., McQueen, J. M., & Norris, D. (in press). How abstract phonemic categories are necessary for coping with speaker-related variation. In C. Fougeron (Ed.), Papers in laboratory phonology 10. Berlin, Germany: Mouton de Gruyter.
7. Cutler, A., McQueen, J. M., Butterfield, S., & Norris, D. (2008). Prelexically-driven perceptual retuning of phoneme boundaries. In J. Fletcher, D. Loakes, M. Wagner, & R. Goecke (Eds.), Proceedings of Interspeech 2008 [CD-ROM]. Brisbane, Australia.
8. Cutler, A., Weber, A., & Otake, T. (2006). Asymmetric mapping from phonetic to lexical representations in second-language listening. Journal of Phonetics, 34, 269-284.
9. Cutler, A., Weber, A., Smits, R., & Cooper, N. (2004). Patterns of English phoneme confusions by native and non-native listeners. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 116, 3668-3678.
10. Dell, G. S. (1988). The retrieval of phonological forms in production: Test of predictions from a connectionist model. Journal of Memory and Language, 27, 124-142.
11. Dell, G. S. (1990). Effects of frequency and vocabulary type on phonological speech errors. Language and Cognitive Processes, 5, 313-349.
12. Donselaar, W. van, Koster, M., & Cutler, A. (2005). Exploring the role of lexical stress in lexical recognition. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 58A, 251-273.
13. Donselaar, W. van, Kuijpers, C., & Cutler, A. (1999). Facilitatory effects of vowel epenthesis on word processing in Dutch. Journal of Memory and Language, 41, 59-77.
14. Eisner, F., & McQueen, J. M. (2005). The specificity of perceptual learning in speech processing. Perception & Psychophysics, 67, 224-238.
15. Eisner, F., & McQueen, J. M. (2006). Perceptual learning in speech: Stability over time. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 119, 1950-1953.
16. Escudero, P., Hayes-Harb, R., & Mitterer, H. (2008). Novel second-language words and asymmetric lexical access. Journal of Phonetics, 36, 345-360.
17. Gaskell, M., & Marslen-Wilson, W. D. (1997). Integrating form and meaning: A distributed model of speech perception. Language and Cognitive Processes, 12, 613-656.
18. 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.
19. Goldinger, S. D. (1998). Echoes of echoes? An episodic theory of lexical access. Psychological Review, 105, 251-279.
20. Goldinger, S. D. (2007). A complementary-systems approach to abstract and episodic speech perception. In J. Trouvain & W. J. Barry (Eds.), Proceedings of the 16th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences (ICPhS 2007) (pp. 49-54). Dudweiler, Germany: Pirrot.
21. Hintzman, D. L. (1986). "Schema abstraction" in a multiple-trace memory model. Psychological Review, 93, 411-428.
22. Iverson, P., Kuhl, P. K., Akahane-Yamada, R., Diesch, E., Tohkura, Y., Ketterman, A., et al. (2003). A perceptual interference account of acquisition diffi-culties for non-native phonemes. Cognition, 87, B47-B57.
23. Jescheniak, J. D., & Levelt, W. J. M. (1994). Word frequency effects in speech production: Retrieval of syntactic information and of phonological form. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 20, 824-843.
24. Jesse, A., & McQueen, J. M. (2007). Prelexical adjustments to speaker idiosyncracies: Are they positionspecific? In H. van Hamme & R. van Son (Eds.), Proceedings of Interspeech 2007, Antwerpen, Belgium (pp. 1597-1600) [DVD]. Adelaide, Australia: Causal Productions.
25. Kaminski, J., Call, J., & Fischer, J. (2004). Word learning in a domestic dog: Evidence for fast mapping. Science, 304, 1682-1683.
26. Kraljic, T., Brennan, S. E., & Samuel, A. G. (2008a). Accommodating variation: Dialects, idiolects, and speech processing. Cognition, 107, 54-81.
27. Kraljic, T., & Samuel, A. G. (2005). Perceptual learning for speech: Is there a return to normal? Cognitive Psychology, 51, 141-178.
28. Kraljic, T., & Samuel, A. G. (2006). Generalization in perceptual learning for speech. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 13, 262-268.
29. Kraljic, T., & Samuel, A. G. (2007). Perceptual adjustments to multiple speakers. Journal of Memory and Language, 56, 1-15.
30. Kraljic, T., Samuel, A. G., & Brennan, S. E. (2008b). First impressions and last resorts: How listeners adjust to speaker variability. Psychological Science, 19, 332-338.
31. Levelt, W. J. M., Roelofs, A., & Meyer, A. S. (1999). A theory of lexical access in speech production. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 22, 1-38.
32. Luce, P. A., & Lyons, E. A. (1998). Specificity of memory representations for spoken words. Memory & Cognition, 26, 708-715.
33. Magnuson, J. S., Dixon, J. A., Tanenhaus, M. K., & Aslin, R. N. (2007). The dynamics of lexical competition during spoken word recognition. Cognitive Science, 31, 1-24.
34. McClelland, J. L., & Elman, J. L. (1986). The TRACE model of speech perception. Cognitive Psychology, 18, 1-86.
35. McClelland, J. L., Mirman, D., & Holt, L. L. (2006). Are there interactive processes in speech perception? Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 10, 363-369.
36. McLennan, C. T., Luce, P. A., & Charles-Luce, J. (2003) Representation of lexical form. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 29, 539-553.
37. McQueen, J. M., Cutler, A., & Norris, D. (2006a). Phonological abstraction in the mental lexicon. Cognitive Science, 30, 1113-1126.
38. McQueen, J. M., Dahan, D., & Cutler, A. (2003). Continuity and gradedness in speech processing. In N. O. Schiller & A. S. Meyer (Eds.), Phonetics and phonology in language comprehension and production: Differences and similarities (pp. 39-78). Berlin, Germany: Mouton de Gruyter.
39. McQueen, J. M., Norris, D., & Cutler, A. (2006b). Are there really interactive processes in speech perception? Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 10, 533.
40. McQueen, J. M., Norris, D., & Cutler, A. (2006c). The dynamic nature of speech perception. Language and Speech, 49, 101-112.
41. Mitterer, H., & De Ruiter, J. P. (2008). Recalibrating color categories using world knowledge. Psychological Science, 19, 629-634.
42. Mullennix, J. W., Pisoni, D. B., & Martin, C. S. (1989). Some effects of talker variability on spoken word recognition. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 85, 365-378.
43. Norris, D. (1994). Shortlist: A connectionist model of continuous speech recognition. Cognition, 52, 189-234.
44. Norris, D., Butterfield, S., McQueen, J. M., & Cutler, A. (2006a). Lexically-guided retuning of letter perception. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 59, 1505-1515.
45. Norris, D., Cutler, A., McQueen, J. M., & Butterfield, S. (2006b). Phonological and conceptual activation in speech comprehension. Cognitive Psychology, 53, 146-193.
46. Norris, D., & McQueen, J. M. (2008). Shortlist B: A Bayesian model of continuous speech recognition. Psychological Review, 115, 357-395.
47. Norris, D., McQueen, J. M, & Cutler, A. (2000). Merging information in speech recognition: Feedback is never necessary. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 23, 299-370.
48. Norris, D., McQueen, J. M., & Cutler, A. (2003). Perceptual learning in speech. Cognitive Psychology, 47, 204-238.
49. Nygaard, L. C., Sommers, M. S., & Pisoni, D. B. (1994). Speech perception as a talker-contingent process. Psychological Science, 5, 42-46.
50. Pisoni, D. B., & Levi, S. V. (2007). Some observations on representations and representational specificity in speech perception and spoken word recognition. In M. G. Gaskell (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of psycholinguistics (pp. 3-18). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
51. Sjerps, M. J. (2007). Nonnative phonemes are open to native interpretation: A study on the flexibility of speech perception. Unpublished MSc thesis, Radboud University, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
52. Soto-Faraco, S., Sebastián-Gallés, N., & Cutler, A. (2001). Segmental and suprasegmental mismatch in lexical access. Journal of Memory and Language, 45, 412-432.
53. Sumner, M., & Samuel, A. G. (2005). Perception and representation of regular variation: The case of final /t/. Journal of Memory and Language, 52, 322-338.
54. Swinney, D. A. (1979). Lexical access during sentence comprehension: (Re)consideration of context effects. Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior, 18, 645-659.
55. Takagi, N. (1995). Signal detection modeling of Japanese listeners' /r/-/l/ labeling behavior in a one-interval identification task. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 97, 563-574.
56. Tanenhaus, M., & Spivey-Knowlton, M. (1996). Eye-tracking. Language and Cognitive Processes, 11, 583-588.
57. Vitevitch, M. S. (2003). The influence of sublexical and lexical representations on the processing of spoken words in English. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics, 17, 487-499.
58. Vitevitch, M. S., & Luce, P. A. (1998). When words compete: Levels of processing in the perception of spoken words. Psychological Science, 9, 325-329.
59. Wagner, A., Ernestus, M., & Cutler, A. (2006). Formant transitions in fricative identification: The role of native fricative inventory. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 120, 2267-2277.
60. Weber, A., & Cutler, A. (2004). Lexical competition in non-native spoken-word recognition. Journal of Memory and Language, 50, 1-25.