Cue-integration and context effects in speech: Evidence against speaking-rate normalization

Attention, Perception, and Psychophysics

Volumn 74, Issue 6, 2012, Pages 1284-1301

  Toscano, Joseph C ^a,b   McMurray, Bob ^b,c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT URBANA CHAMPAIGN   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF IOWA   (United States)

^c University of Iowa   (United States)

Author keywords

Eye movements; Speech perception; Spoken word recognition

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; ASSOCIATION; COMMUNICATION AID; EYE FIXATION; HUMAN; PAIRED ASSOCIATE LEARNING; PATTERN RECOGNITION; PHONETICS; SACCADIC EYE MOVEMENT; SEMANTICS; SOUND DETECTION; SPEECH; SPEECH ANALYSIS; SPEECH PERCEPTION; VERBAL BEHAVIOR;

COMMUNICATION AIDS FOR DISABLED; CUES; FIXATION, OCULAR; HUMANS; PAIRED-ASSOCIATE LEARNING; PATTERN RECOGNITION, VISUAL; PHONETICS; SACCADES; SEMANTICS; SOUND SPECTROGRAPHY; SPEECH ACOUSTICS; SPEECH PERCEPTION; SPEECH PRODUCTION MEASUREMENT; VERBAL BEHAVIOR;

EID: 84864569918     PISSN: 19433921     EISSN: 1943393X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3758/s13414-012-0306-z     Document Type: Article

References (69)

1. Allen, J. S., & Miller, J. L. (1999). Effects of syllable-initial voicing and speaking rate on the temporal characteristics of monosyllabic words. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 106, 2031-2039.
2. Allen, J. S., Miller, J. L., & DeSteno, D. (2003). Individual talker differences in voice-onset-time. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 113, 544-552.
3. Andruski, J. E., Blumstein, S. E., & Burton, M. (1994). The effect of subphonetic differences on lexical access. Cognition, 52, 163-187.
4. Apfelbaum, K. S., Blumstein, S. E., & McMurray, B. (2011). Semantic priming is affected by real-time phonological competition: Evidence for continuous cascading systems. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 18, 141-149. doi: 10. 3758/s13423-010-0039-8.
5. Apfelbaum, K. S., & McMurray, B. (2011). Using variability to guide dimensional weighting: Associative mechanisms in early word learning. Cognitive Science, 35, 1105-1138. doi: 10. 1111/j. 1551-6709. 2011. 01181. x.
6. Beckman, J., Helgason, P., McMurray, B., & Ringen, C. (2011). Rate effects on Swedish VOT: Evidence for phonological overspecification. Journal of Phonetics, 39, 39-49.
7. Bernstein, R. (2000). The Eyelink PsyExtension. Retrieved from www. psych. uni-potsdam. de/cognitive/eyetracker/eyelink-psyextension. html.
8. Boersma, P., & Weenink, D. (2009). Praat: Doing phonetics by computer [Computer program]. Retrieved from www. praat. org.
9. Boucher, V. J. (2002). Timing relations in speech and the identification of voice-onset times: A stable perceptual boundary for voicing categories across speaking rates. Perception & Psychophysics, 64, 121-130.
10. Cho, T., & Ladefoged, P. (1999). Variation and universals in VOT: Evidence from 18 languages. Journal of Phonetics, 27, 207-229.
11. Cohen, J., MacWhinney, B., Flatt, M., & Provost, J. (1993). PsyScope: An interactive graphic system for designing and controlling experiments in the psychology laboratory using Macintosh computers. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 25, 257-271. doi: 10. 3758/BF03204507.
12. Creel, S., Aslin, R. N., & Tanenhaus, M. K. (2008). Heeding the voice of experience: The role of talker variation in lexical access. Cognition, 106, 633-664.
13. Diehl, R. L., Souther, A. F., & Convis, C. L. (1980). Conditions on rate normalization in speech perception. Perception & Psychophysics, 27, 435-443.
14. Dupoux, E., & Green, K. (1997). Perceptual adjustment to highly compressed speech: Effects of talker and rate changes. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and Performance, 23, 914-927.
15. Ernst, M. O., & Banks, M. S. (2002). Humans integrate visual and haptic information in a statistically optimal fashion. Nature, 415, 429-433. doi: 10. 1038/415429a.
16. Francis, A. L., & Nusbaum, H. C. (2002). Selective attention and the acquisition of new phonetic categories. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and Performance, 28, 349-366. doi: 10. 1037/0096-1523. 28. 2. 349.
17. Goldinger, S. D. (1998). Echoes of echoes? An episodic theory of lexical access. Psychological Review, 105, 251-279. doi: 10. 1037/0033-295X. 105. 2. 251.
18. Goldrick, M., & Blumstein, S. E. (2006). Cascading activation from phonological planning to articulatory processes: Evidence from tongue twisters. Language & Cognitive Processes, 21, 649-683.
19. Hillenbrand, J. M., Clark, M. J., & Houde, R. A. (2000). Some effects of duration on vowel recognition. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 106, 3013-3022.
20. Holt, L. L., & Lotto, A. J. (2010). Speech perception as categorization. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 72, 1218-1227. doi: 10. 3758/APP. 72. 5. 1218.
21. House, A. S. (1961). On vowel duration in English. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 33, 1174-1178.
22. Jacobs, R. A. (2002). What determines visual cue reliability? TRENDS in Cognitive Sciences, 6, 345-350.
23. Johnson, K. (1997). Speech perception without speaker normalization. In K. Johnson & J. Mullennix (Eds.), Talker variability in speech processing (pp. 145-165). New York: Academic Press.
24. Kessinger, R. H., & Blumstein, S. E. (1997). Effects of speaking rate on voice-onset time in Thai, French, and English. Journal of Phonetics, 25, 143-168.
25. Kessinger, R. H., & Blumstein, S. E. (1998). Effects of speaking rate on voice-onset time and vowel production: Some implications for perception studies. Journal of Phonetics, 26, 117-128.
26. Klatt, D. H. (1980). Software for a cascade/parallel formant synthesizer. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 67, 971-995.
27. Lisker, L., & Abramson, A. S. (1964). A cross-linguistic of voicing in initial stops: Acoustical measurements. Word, 20, 384-422.
28. Luck, S. J. (2005). An introduction to the event-related potential technique. Cambridge: MIT Press.
29. Magloire, J., & Greene, K. P. (1999). A cross-language comparison of speaking rate effects on the production of voice onset time in English and Spanish. Phonetica, 56, 158-185.
30. Massaro, D. W., & Oden, G. C. (1980). Evaluation and integration of acoustic features in speech perception. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 67, 996-1013.
31. McMurray, B. (2008). KlattWorks: A [somewhat] new systematic approach to formant-based speech synthesis for empirical research. Manuscript in preparation.
32. sMcMurray, B., Aslin, R. N., Tanenhaus, M. K., Spivey, M. J., & Subik, D. (2008a). Gradient sensitivity to within-category variation in words and syllables. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and Performance, 34, 1609-1631.
33. McMurray, B., Clayards, M., Tanenhaus, M. K., & Aslin, R. N. (2008b). Tracking the time course of phonetic cue integration during spoken word recognition. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 15, 1064-1071.
34. McMurray, B., & Jongman, A. (2011). What information is necessary for speech categorization? Harnessing variability in the speech signal by integrating cues computed relative to expectations. Psychological Review, 118, 219-246.
35. McMurray, B., Samelson, V., Lee, S., & Tomblin, J. B. (2010). Eye-movements reveal the time-course of online spoken word recognition language impaired and normal adolescents. Cognitive Psychology, 60, 1-39.
36. McMurray, B., Tanenhaus, M. K., & Aslin, R. N. (2002). Gradient effects of within-category phonetic variation on lexical access. Cognition, 86, B33-B42.
37. McMurray, B., Tanenhaus, M. K., & Aslin, R. N. (2009). Within-category VOT affects recovery from "lexical" garden-paths: Evidence against phoneme-level inhibition. Journal of Memory and Language, 60, 65-91.
38. Miller, J., Patterson, T., & Ulrich, R. (1998). Jackknife-based method for measuring LRP onset latency differences. Psychophysiology, 35, 99-115. doi: 10. 1111/1469-8986. 3510099.
39. Miller, J. L., & Dexter, E. R. (1988). Effects of speaking rate and lexical status on phonetic perception. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and Performance, 14, 369-378. doi: 10. 1037/0096-1523. 14. 3. 369.
40. Miller, J. L., Green, K. P., & Reeves, A. (1986). Speaking rate and segments: A look at the relation between speech production and speech perception for the voicing contrast. Phonetica, 43, 106-115.
41. Miller, J. L., Grosjean, F., & Lomanto, C. (1984). Articulation rate and its variability in spontaneous speech: A reanalysis and some implications. Phonetica, 41, 215-225.
42. Miller, J. L., & Liberman, A. M. (1979). Some effects of later-occurring information on the perception of stop consonant and semivowel. Perception & Psychophysics, 25, 457-465.
43. Miller, J. L., & Volaitis, L. E. (1989). Effect of speaking rate on the perceptual structure of a phonetic category. Perception & Psychophysics, 46, 505-512.
44. Miller, J. L., & Wayland, S. C. (1993). Limits on the limitations of context-conditioned effects in the perception of [b] and [w]. Perception & Psychophysics, 54, 205-210.
45. Mordkoff, J. T., & Gianaros, P. (2000). Detecting the onset of the lateralized readiness potential: A comparison of available methods and procedures. Psychophysiology, 37, 347-360.
46. Moulines, E., & Carpentier, F. (1990). Pitch-synchronous waveform processing techniques for text-to-speech synthesis using diphones. Speech Communication, 9, 453-467.
47. Nearey, T. M. (1990). The segment as a unit of speech perception. Journal of Phonetics, 18, 347-373.
48. Nearey, T. M. (1997). Speech perception as pattern recognition. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 101, 3241-3254.
49. Nearey, T. M., & Assmann, P. F. (1986). Modeling the role of inherent spectral change in vowel identification. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 80, 1297-1308.
50. Nearey, T. M., & Hogan, J. (1986). Phonological contrast in experimental phonetics: Relating distributions of measurements in production data to perceptual categorization curves. In J. J. Ohala & J. J. Jaeger (Eds.), Experimental phonology (pp. 141-161). Orlando: Academic Press.
51. Oden, G. C., & Massaro, D. W. (1978). Integration of feature information in speech perception. Psychological Review, 85, 172-191.
52. Palmeri, T. J., Goldinger, S. D., & Pisoni, D. B. (1993). Episodic encoding of voice attributes and recognition memory for spoken words. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 19, 309-328. doi: 10. 1037/0278-7393. 19. 2. 309.
53. Peterson, G. E., & Lehiste, I. (1960). Duration of syllable nuclei in English. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 32, 693-703.
54. Pind, J. (1995). Speaking rate, VOT and quantity: The search for higher-order invariants for two Icelandic speech cues. Perception & Psychophysics, 57, 291-304.
55. Pisoni, D. B., & Tash, J. (1974). Reaction times to comparisons within and across phonetic categories. Perception & Psychophysics, 15, 285-290. doi: 10. 3758/BF03213946.
56. Repp, B. H. (1982). Phonetic trading relations and context effects: New experimental evidence for a speech mode of perception. Psychological Bulletin, 82, 81-110.
57. Repp, B. H., Liberman, A. M., Eccardt, T., & Pesetsky, D. (1978). Perceptual integration of acoustic cues for stop, fricative, and affricate manner. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and Performance, 4, 621-637. doi: 10. 1037/0096-1523. 4. 4. 621.
58. Salverda, A. P., Dahan, D., & McQueen, J. M. (2003). The role of prosodic boundaries in the resolution of lexical embedding in speech comprehension. Cognition, 90, 51-89.
59. Shinn, P. C., Blumstein, S. E., & Jongman, A. (1985). Limitations of context conditioned effects in the perception of [b] and [w]. Perception & Psychophysics, 38, 397-407.
60. Smiljanic, R., & Bradlow, A. (2008). Stability of temporal contrasts across speaking styles in English and Croatian. Journal of Phonetics, 30, 91-113.
61. Smits, R. (2001a). Evidence for hierarchical categorization of coarticulated phonemes. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and Performance, 27, 1145-1162. doi: 10. 1037/0096-1523. 27. 5. 1145.
62. Smits, R. (2001b). Hierarchical categorization of coarticulated phonemes: A theoretical analysis. Perception & Psychophysics, 63, 1109-1139. doi: 10. 3758/BF03194529.
63. Summerfield, Q. (1981). Articulatory rate and perceptual constancy in phonetic perception. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and Performance, 7, 1074-1095.
64. Toscano, J. C., & McMurray, B. (2010). Cue integration with categories: Weighting acoustic cues in speech using unsupervised learning and distributional statistics. Cognitive Science, 34, 436-464.
65. Toscano, J. C., McMurray, B., Dennhardt, J., & Luck, S. J. (2010). Continuous perception and graded categorization: Electrophysiological evidence for a linear relationship between the acoustic signal and perceptual encoding of speech. Psychological Science, 21, 1532-1540.
66. Turk, A., Nakai, S., & Sugahara, M. (2006). Acoustic segment durations in prosodic research: A practical guide. In S. Sudhoff, D. Lenertová, R. Meyer, S. Pappert, P. Augurzky, I. Mleinek, . . . J. Schließer (Eds.), Methods in empirical prosody research (pp. 1-28). Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
67. Utman, J. A. (1998). Effects of local speaking rate context on the perception of voice-onset time in initial stop consonants. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 103, 1640-1653.
68. Warren, P., & Marslen-Wilson, W. (1988). Cues to lexical choice: Discriminating place and voice. Perception & Psychophysics, 43, 21-30.
69. Wayland, S. C., Miller, J. L., & Volaitis, L. E. (1994). The influence of sentential speaking rate on the internal structure of phonetic categories. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 95, 2694-2701.