Auditory-phonetic projection and lexical structure in the recognition of sine-wave words

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance

Volumn 37, Issue 3, 2011, Pages 968-977

  Remez, Robert E ^a   Dubowski, Kathryn R ^a   Broder, Robin S ^a   Davids, Morgana L ^a   Grossman, Yael S ^a   Moskalenko, Marina ^a   Pardo, Jennifer S ^a   Hasbun, Sara Maria ^a  

^a Program on US Russia Relations at Columbia s Harriman Institute   (United States)

Author keywords

Sine wave speech; Speech perception; Spoken word recognition

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; AUDITORY STIMULATION; FEMALE; HEARING; HUMAN; LINGUISTICS; MALE; METHODOLOGY; PATTERN RECOGNITION; PERIODICITY; REFERENCE VALUE; SOUND DETECTION; SPEECH;

ACOUSTIC STIMULATION; AUDITORY PERCEPTION; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; PATTERN RECOGNITION, PHYSIOLOGICAL; PERIODICITY; PSYCHOLINGUISTICS; REFERENCE VALUES; SOUND SPECTROGRAPHY; SPEECH ACOUSTICS;

EID: 79958694139     PISSN: 00961523     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/a0020734     Document Type: Article

References (53)

1. Allen J.S., Miller J.L. Listener sensitivity to individual talker differences in voice onset-time. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 2004, 115:3171-3183.
2. Bertelson P., Vroomen J., de Gelder B. Visual recalibration of auditory speech identification: A McGurk aftereffect. Psychological Science 2003, 14:592-597.
3. Bradlow A.R., Bent T. The clear speech effect for non-native listeners. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 2002, 112:272-284.
4. Bradlow A.R., Pisoni D.B. Recognition of spoken words by native and non-native listeners: Talker-, listener-, and item-related factors. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 1999, 106:2074-2085.
5. Bregman A.S. Auditory scene analysis 1990, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
6. Brungart D., Iyer N., Simpson B. Monaural speech segregation using synthetic speech signals. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 2006, 119:2327-2333.
7. Clarke C.M., Garrett M.F. Rapid adaptation to foreign-accented English. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 2004, 116:3647-3658.
8. Cutler A. The abstract representations in speech processing. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 2008, 61:1601-1619.
9. Davis M.H., Johnsrude I.S., Hervais-Adelman A., Taylor K., McGettigan C. Lexical information drives perceptual learning of distorted speech: Evidence from the comprehension of noise-vocoded sentences. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 2005, 134:222-241.
10. Diehl R.L., Lotto A.J., Holt L.L. Speech perception. Annual Review of Psychology 2004, 55:149-179.
11. Eisner F., McQueen J.M. Perceptual learning in speech: Stability over time. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 2006, 119:1950-1953.
12. Elliott T.M., Theunissen F.E. The modulation transfer function for speech intelligibility. PLoS Computational Biology 2009, 5.3, e1000302.
13. Fellowes J.M., Remez R.E., Rubin P.E. Perceiving the sex and identity of a talker without natural vocal timbre. Perception & Psychophysics 1997, 59:839-849.
14. Gibson E.J. Principles of perceptual learning and development 1969, Appleton-Century-Crofts, New York.
15. Goldinger S.D. Echoes of echoes? An episodic theory of lexical access. Psychological Review 1998, 105:251-279.
16. Greenspan S.L., Nusbaum H.C., Pisoni D.B. Perceptual learning of synthetic speech produced by rule. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 1988, 14:421-433.
17. Hervais-Adelman A., Davis M.H., Johnsrude I.S., Carlyon R.P. Perceptual learning of noise vocoded words: Effects of feedback and lexicality. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 2008, 34:460-474.
18. Kraljic T., Brennan S.E., Samuel A.G. Accommodating variation: Dialects, idiolects, and speech processing. Cognition 2008, 107:54-81.
19. Kučera H., Francis W.N. Computational analysis of present-day American English 1967, Brown University Press, Providence.
20. Liberman A.M., Cooper F.S. In search of the acoustic cues. Papers in linguistics and phonetics to the memory of Pierre Delattre 1972, 329-338. Mouton, The Hague. A. Valdman (Ed.).
21. Liebenthal E., Binder J.R., Piorkowski R.L., Remez R.E. Short-term reorganization of auditory analysis induced by phonetic experience. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 2003, 15:549-558.
22. Lindblom B. Explaining phonetic variation: A sketch of the H & H theory. Speech production and speech modelling 1990, 403-439. Kluwer, Dordrecht. W.J. Hardcastle, A. Marchal (Eds.).
23. Luce P.A., Goldinger S.D., Auer E.T., Vitevitch M.S. Phonetic priming, neighborhood activation, and PARSYN. Perception & Psychophysics 2000, 62:615-625.
24. Luce P.A., Pisoni D.B. Recognizing spoken words: The neighborhood activation model. Ear and Hearing 1998, 19:1-38.
25. McLennan C.T., Luce P.A., Charles-Luce J. Representation of lexical form. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 2003, 29:539-553.
26. Miller G.A., Chomsky N. Finitary models of language users. Handbook of mathematical psychology 1960, 2:419-491. Wiley, New York. R.D. Luce, R.R. Bush, E. Galanter (Eds.).
27. Miller G.A., Nicely P.E. An analysis of perceptual confusions among some English consonants. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 1955, 27:338-352.
28. Mullennix J.W., Pisoni D.B., Martin C.S. Some effects of talker variability on spoken word recognition. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 1989, 85:165-178.
29. Nolan F. The phonetic basis of speaker recognition 1983, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England.
30. Nusbaum H.C., Pisoni D.B., Davis C.K. Sizing up the Hoosier mental lexicon: Measuring the familiarity of 20,000 words. Research in speech perception, Progress Report 10 1984, 357-376. Indiana University, Bloomington.
31. Nygaard L.C., Pisoni D.B. Talker-specific learning in speech perception. Perception & Psychophysics 1998, 60:355-376.
32. Nygaard L.C., Sommers M.S., Pisoni D.B. Speech perception as a talker-contingent process. Psychological Science 1994, 5:42-46.
33. Pardo J.S., Remez R.E. The perception of speech. The handbook of psycholinguistics 2006, 201-248. Academic Press, New York. 2nd ed. M. Traxler, M.A. Gernsbacher (Eds.).
34. Pisoni D.B., Levi S.V. Some observations on representations and representational specificity in speech perception and spoken word recognition. The Oxford handbook of psycholinguistics 2007, 3-18. Oxford University Press, Oxford, England. M.G. Gaskell (Ed.).
35. Pisoni D.B., Nusbaum H.C., Luce P.A., Slowiaczek L.M. Speech perception, word recognition and the structure of the lexicon. Speech Communication 1985, 4:75-95.
36. Raphael L.J. Acoustic cues to the perception of segmental phonemes. The handbook of speech perception 2005, 182-206. Blackwell, Oxford, England. D.B. Pisoni, R.E. Remez (Eds.).
37. Remez R.E. The perceptual organization of speech. The handbook of speech perception 2005, 27-50. Blackwell, Oxford, England. D.B. Pisoni, R.E. Remez (Eds.).
38. Remez, R. E. (2008). Sine-wave speech. In E. M. Izhikovitch (Ed.), Encyclopedia of computational neuroscience (p. 2394). (Cited as Scholarpedia, 3, 2394).
39. Remez R.E., Fellowes J.M., Nagel D.S. On the perception of similarity among talkers. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 2007, 122:3688-3696.
40. Remez R.E., Fellowes J.M., Rubin P.E. Talker identification based on phonetic information. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 1997, 23:651-666.
41. Remez R.E., Pardo J.S., Piorkowski R.L., Rubin P.E. On the bistability of sine wave analogues of speech. Psychological Science 2001, 12:24-29.
42. Remez R.E., Rubin P.E. On the perception of speech from time-varying attributes: Contributions of amplitude variation. Perception & Psychophysics 1990, 48:313-325.
43. Remez R.E., Rubin P.E., Berns S.M., Pardo J.S., Lang J.M. On the perceptual organization of speech. Psychological Review 1994, 101:129-156.
44. Remez R.E., Rubin P.E., Nygaard L.C., Howell W.A. Perceptual normalization of vowels produced by sinusoidal voices. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 1987, 13:41-60.
45. Remez R.E., Rubin P.E., Pisoni D.B., Carrell T.D. Speech perception without traditional speech cues. Science 1981, May 22, 212:947-950.
46. Rubin P.E. Sinewave synthesis [Internal memorandum] 1980, Haskins Laboratories, New Haven, CT.
47. Shannon R.V., Zeng F.-G., Kamath V., Wygonski J., Ekelid M. Speech recognition with primarily temporal cues. Science 1995, October 13, 270:303-304.
48. Sheffert S.M., Pisoni D.B., Fellowes J.M., Remez R.E. Learning to recognize talkers from natural, sinewave and reversed speech samples. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 2002, 28:1447-1469.
49. Smith Z.M., Delgutte B., Oxenham A.J. Chimaeric sounds reveal dichotomies in auditory perception. Nature 2002, March 7, 416:87-90.
50. Sommers M.S., Kirk K.I., Pisoni D.B. Some considerations in evaluating spoken word recognition by normal-hearing, noise-masked normal-hearing, and cochlear implant users: I. The effects of response format. Ear and Hearing 1997, 18:89-99.
51. Sommers M.S., Nygaard L.C., Pisoni D.B. Stimulus variability and spoken word recognition: I. Effects of variability in speaking rate and overall amplitude. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 1994, 96:1314-1324.
52. Stevens K.N., Blumstein S.E. The search for invariant acoustic correlates of phonetic features. Perspectives on the study of speech 1981, 1-38. Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ. P.D. Eimas, J.L. Miller (Eds.).
53. Trout J.D. Lexical boosting of noise-band speech in open- and closed-set formats. Speech Communication 2005, 47:424-435.