The roles of bottom-up and top-down information in the recognition of reduced speech: Evidence from listeners with normal and impaired hearing

Journal of Phonetics

Volumn 39, Issue 3, 2011, Pages 330-343

  Janse, Esther ^a,b   Ernestus, Mirjam ^b,c  

^a UTRECHT UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

^b MAX PLANCK INSTITUTE FOR PSYCHOLINGUISTICS   (Netherlands)

^c RADBOUD UNIVERSITY NIJMEGEN   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 79960572572     PISSN: 00954470     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.wocn.2011.03.005     Document Type: Article

References (68)

1. Baayen R.H., Davidson D.J., Bates D.M. Mixed-effects modelling with crossed random effects for subjects and items. Journal of Memory and Language 2008, 59:390-412.
2. Bilger R.C., Neutzel J.M., Rzeczowski C. Standardisation of a test of speech perception in noise. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research 1984, 27:32-48.
3. Coleman J. Discovering the acoustic correlates of phonological contrasts. Journal of Phonetics 2003, 31:351-372.
4. Craig C.H. Effects of aging on time-gated isolated word-recognition performance. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research 1992, 35:234-238.
5. Craig C.H., Kim B.W., Rhyner P.M.P., Chirillo T.K.B. Effects of word predictability, child development, and aging on time-gated speech recognition performance. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research 1993, 36:832-841.
6. Dilley L.C., McAuley J.D. Distal prosodic context affects word segmentation and lexical processing. Journal of Memory and Language 2008, 59:294-311.
7. Ellis L., Hardcastle W.J. Categorical and gradient properties of assimilation in alveolar to velar sequences: Evidence from EPG and EMA data. Journal of Phonetics 2002, 30:373-396.
8. Ernestus M. Voice assimilation and segment reduction in casual Dutch, a corpus-based study of the phonology-phonetics interface 2000, LOT, Utrecht.
9. Ernestus, M., & Baayen, R. H. (2007). The comprehension of acoustically reduced morphologically complex words: The roles of deletion, duration and frequency of occurrence. In Proceedings of the 16th international congress of phonetic sciences (pp. 773-776). Saarbruecken, Germany.
10. Ernestus M., Baayen H., Schreuder R. The recognition of reduced word forms. Brain and Language 2002, 81:162-173.
11. Garner W.R. The processing of information and structure 1974, Erlbaum, Potomac, MD (USA).
12. Gaskell M.G. Modeling regressive and progressive effects of assimilation in speech perception. Journal of Phonetics 2003, 31:447-463.
13. Gaskell M.G., Marslen-Wilson W.D. Phonological variation and inference in lexical access. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 1996, 22:144-158.
14. Gaskell M.G., Marslen-Wilson W.D. Mechanisms of phonological inference in speech perception. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 1998, 24:380-396.
15. Gaskell M.G., Snoeren N. The impact of strong assimilation on the perception of connected speech. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 2008, 34:1632-1647.
16. Gow D.W. Assimilation and anticipation in continuous spoken word recognition. Journal of Memory and Language 2001, 45:133-159.
17. Gow D.W. Does English coronal place assimilation create lexical ambiguity?. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 2002, 28:163-179.
18. Hargus S.E., Gordon-Salant S. Accuracy of speech intelligibility index predictions for noise-masked young listeners with normal hearing and for elderly listeners with hearing impairment. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research 1995, 38:234-243.
19. Hawkins S. Roles and representations of systematic fine phonetic detail in speech understanding. Journal of Phonetics 2003, 31:373-405.
20. Hawkins S., Smith R. Polysp: A polysystemic, phonetically rich approach to speech understanding. Italian Journal of Linguistics-Rivista di Linguistica 2001, 13:99-188.
21. Heid, S., & Hawkins, S. (2000). An acoustical study of long-domain /r/ and /l/ coarticulation. In Proceedings of the fifth seminar on speech production: Models and data (ISCA) (pp. 77-80). Kloster Seeon, Bavaria, Germany.
22. Humes L.E., Dirks D.D., Bell T.S., Kincaid G.E. Recognition of nonsense syllables by hearing-impaired listeners and by noise-masked normal hearers. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 1987, 81:765-773.
23. Humes L.E., Lee J.H., Coughlin M.P. Auditory measures of selective and divided attention in young and older adults using single-talker competition. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 2006, 120:2926-2937.
24. Janse E. Word perception in fast speech: Artificially time-compressed vs. naturally produced fast speech. Speech Communication 2004, 42:155-173.
25. Janse E. Processing of fast speech by elderly listeners. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 2009, 125:2361-2373.
26. Janse E., Nooteboom S., Quené H. Coping with gradient forms of /t/-deletion and lexical ambiguity in spoken word recognition. Language and Cognitive Processes 2007, 22:161-200.
27. Jerger J., Jerger S., Pirozzolo F. Correlational analysis of speech audiometric scores, hearing loss, age, and cognitive abilities in the elderly. Ear and Hearing 1991, 12:103-109.
28. Johnson K. Massive reduction in conversational American English. Spontaneous speech: Data and analysis. Proceedings of the 1st session of the 10th international symposium 2004, 29-54. The National International Institute for Japanese Language, Tokyo, Japan. K. Yoneyama, K. Maekawa (Eds.).
29. Kalikow D.N., Stevens K.N., Elliott L.L. Development of a test of speech intelligibility in noise using sentence materials with controlled word predictability. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 1977, 6l:1337-1361.
30. Kelly, J., & Local, J. K. (1986). Long domain resonance patterns in English. In International conference on speech input/output: Techniques and applications (pp. 304-309). Conference Publication No. 258. London: Institute of Electrical Engineers.
31. Kemps R., Ernestus M., Schreuder R., Baayen R.H. Processing reduced word forms: The suffix restoration effect. Brain and Language 2004, 19:117-127.
32. Local J. Variable domains and variable relevance: Interpreting phonetic exponents. Journal of Phonetics 2003, 31:321-339.
33. McClelland J.L., Elman J.L. The TRACE model of speech perception. Cognitive Psychology 1986, 18:1-86.
34. Mitterer H., Yoneyama K., Ernestus M. How we hear what is hardly there: Mechanisms underlying compensation for /t/-reduction in speech comprehension. Journal of Memory and Language 2008, 59:133-152.
35. Nittrouer S., Boothroyd A. Context effects in phoneme and word recognition by young children and older adults. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 1990, 87:2705-2715.
36. Nolan F. The descriptive role of segments: Evidence from assimilation. Papers in laboratory phonology II 1992, 261-280. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. G.J. Docherty, D.R. Ladd (Eds.).
37. Norris D. Shortlist: A connectionist model of continuous speech recognition. Cognition 1994, 52:189-234.
38. Norris D., McQueen J.M., Cutler A. Merging information in speech recognition: Feedback is never necessary. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 2000, 23:299-370.
39. Payton K.L., Uchanski R.M., Braida L.D. Intelligibility of conversational and clear speech in noise and reverberation for listeners with normal and impaired hearing. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 1994, 95:1581-1592.
40. Picheny M.A., Durlach N.I., Braida L.D. Speaking clearly for the hard of hearing. I. Intelligibility differences between clear and conversational speech. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research 1985, 28:96-103.
41. Picheny M.A., Durlach N.I., Braida L.D. Speaking clearly for the hard of hearing. II. Acoustic characteristics of clear and conversational speech. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research 1986, 29:434-446.
42. Picheny M.A., Durlach N.I., Braida L.D. Speaking clearly for the hard of hearing. III. An attempt to determine the contribution of speaking rate to differences in intelligibility between clear and conversational speech. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research 1989, 32:600-603.
43. Pichora-Fuller M.K., Schneider B., Daneman M. How young and old listeners listen to and remember speech in noise. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 1995, 97:593-608.
44. Pinheiro J.C., Bates D.M. Mixed-effects models in S and S-plus 2000, Springer, New York.
45. Pickett J.M., Pollack I. Intelligibility of excerpts from fluent speech: Effects of rate of utterance and duration of excerpt. Language & Speech 1963, 3:151-164.
46. Quené H., van den Bergh H. On multi-level modeling of data from repeated measures designs: A tutorial. Speech Communication 2004, 43:103-121.
47. Ranbom L.J., Connine C.M. Lexical representation of phonological variation in spoken word recognition. Journal of Memory and Language 2007, 57:273-298.
48. Remez R.E. Establishing and maintaining perceptual coherence: Unimodal and multimodal evidence. Journal of Phonetics 2003, 31:293-304.
49. van Rooij J.C.G.M., Plomp R. Auditive and cognitive factors in speech perception by elderly listeners. II. Multivariate analyses. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 1990, 88:2611-2624.
50. van Rooij J.C.G.M., Plomp R. Auditive and cognitive factors in speech perception by elderly listeners. III. Additional data and final discussion. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 1992, 91:1028-1033.
51. van Rooij J.C.G.M., Plomp R., Orlebeke J.F. Auditive and cognitive factors in speech perception by elderly listeners. I. Development of test battery. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 1989, 86:1294-1309.
52. Salthouse T.A. The processing speed theory of adult age differences in cognition. Psychological Review 1996, 103:403-428.
53. Salverda A.P., Dahan D., McQueen J.M. The role of prosodic boundaries in the resolution of lexical embedding in speech comprehension. Cognition 2003, 90:51-89.
54. Shatzman K.B., McQueen J.M. Segment duration as a cue to word boundaries in spoken-word recognition. Perception & Psychophysics 2006, 68:1-16.
55. Sheldon S., Pichora-Fuller M.K., Schneider B.A. Priming and sentence context support listening to noise-vocoded speech by younger and older adults. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 2008, 123:489-499.
56. Sommers M.S., Danielson S.E. Inhibitory processes and spoken word recognition in young and older adults: The interaction of lexical competition and semantic context. Psychology and Aging 1999, 14:458-472.
57. 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.
58. Spinelli E., McQueen J.M., Cutler A. Processing resyllabified words in French. Journal of Memory and Language 2003, 48:233-254.
59. Stelmachowicz P.G., Lewis D.E., Kelly W.J., Jesteadt W. Speech perception in low-pass filtered noise for normal and hearing-impaired listeners. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research 1990, 33:290-297.
60. Stroop J.R. Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions. Journal of Experimental Psychology 1935, 18:643-661.
61. Swinney D. Lexical access during sentence comprehension: (Re)consideration of context effects. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 1979, 18:645-659.
62. Tucker, B. V., & Warner, N. (2007). Inhibition of processing due to reduction of the American English flap. In Proceedings of the 16th international congress of phonetic sciences (pp. 1949-1952). Saarbruecken, August 2007.
63. Tun P.A., O'Kane G., Wingfield A. Distraction by competing speech in young and older adult listeners. Psychology and Aging 2002, 17:453-467.
64. Tunley, A. (1999). Coarticulatory influences of liquids on vowels in English. Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation. University of Cambridge.
65. Uchanski R.M., Choi S., Braida L.D., Reed C.M., Durlach N.I. Speaking clearly for the hard of hearing. IV. Further studies of the role of speaking rate. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research 1996, 39:494-509.
66. West P. Perception of distributed coarticulatory properties of English /l/ and /È/. Journal of Phonetics 2000, 27:405-425.
67. Wingfield A., Aberdeen J.S., Stine E.A. Word onset gating and linguistic context in spoken word recognition by young and elderly adults. Journal of Gerontology 1991, 46:127-129.
68. Wingfield A., Alexander A.H., Cavigelli S. Does memory constrain utilization of top-down information in spoken word recognition? Evidence from normal aging. Language and Speech 1994, 37:221-235.