Effects of word frequency, contextual diversity, and semantic distinctiveness on spoken word recognition

Journal of the Acoustical Society of America

Volumn 132, Issue 2, 2012, Pages

  Johns, Brendan T ^a   Gruenenfelder, Thomas M ^a   Pisoni, David B ^a   Jones, Michael N ^a  

^a INDIANA UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

DATA SETS; SEMANTIC CONTEXT; SPOKEN WORDS; WORD FREQUENCIES;

DATA MINING; LINGUISTICS; VOCABULARY CONTROL;

SEMANTICS;

ARTICLE; AUDITORY STIMULATION; HUMAN; MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS; NOISE; PERCEPTION; RECOGNITION; SEMANTICS; SPEECH; SPEECH AUDIOMETRY; SPEECH PERCEPTION;

ACOUSTIC STIMULATION; AUDIOMETRY, SPEECH; HUMANS; MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS; NOISE; PERCEPTUAL MASKING; RECOGNITION (PSYCHOLOGY); SEMANTICS; SPEECH ACOUSTICS; SPEECH PERCEPTION;

EID: 84865095568     PISSN: 00014966     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1121/1.4731641     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. Adelman, J. S., Brown, G. D. A., and Quesada, J. F. (2006). Contextual diversity, not word frequency, determines word-naming and lexical decision time., Psychol. Sci. 17, 814-823.
2. Balota, D. A., Cortese, M. J., Sergent-Marshall, S. D., Spieler, D. H., and Yap, M. J. (2004). Visual word recognition of single-syllable words., J. Exp. Psychol. Gen. 133, 283-316.
3. Broadbent, D. E. (1967). Word-frequency effect and response bias., Psychol. Rev. 74, 1-15.
4. Dahan, D., Magnuson, J. S., and Tanenhaus, M. K. (2001). Time course of frequency effects in spoken-word recognition: Evidence from eye movements., Cognitive Psychol. 42, 317-367.
5. Felty, R. A., Buchwald, A., and Pisoni, D. B. (2009). Error analysis of spoken word recognition., Research on Spoken Language Processing: Progress Report No. 29 (Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences, Indiana University Speech Research Laboratory, Bloomington, IN), pp. 183-196.
6. Forster, K. I., and Chambers, S. M. (1973). Lexical access and naming time., J. Verbal Learn. Verbal Behav. 12, 627-635.
7. Goldinger, S. D. (1998). Echoes of echoes? An episodic trace theory of lexical access., Psychol. Rev. 105, 251-279.
8. Hintzman, D. L. (1986). Schema abstraction' in a multiple-trace memory model., Psychol. Rev. 93, 411-428.
9. Hintzman, D. L. (1988). Judgments of frequency and recognition memory in a multiple-trace memory model., Psychol. Rev. 95, 528-551.
10. Howes, D. H. (1957). On the relation between the intelligibility and frequency of occurrence of English words., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 29, 296-305.
11. Jones, M. N., Johns, B. T., and Recchia, G. (2012). The role of semantic diversity in lexical organization., Can. J. Exp. Psychol. 66, 115-124.
12. Krueger, L. E. (1975). Familiarity effects in visual information processing., Psychol. Bull. 82, 949-974.
13. Landauer, T. K., and Dumais, S. T. (1997). A solution to Plato's problem: The latent semantic analysis theory of acquisition, induction, and representation of knowledge., Psychol. Rev. 104, 211-240.
14. Landauer, T. K., and Streeter, L. A. (1973). Structural differences between common and rare words: Failure of equivalence assumptions for theories of word recognition., J. Verbal Learn. Verbal Behav. 12, 119-131.
15. Luce, P. A., and Pisoni, D. B. (1998). Recognizing spoken words: The neighborhood activation model., Ear Hear. 19, 1-36.
16. McClelland, J. L., and Elman, J. L. (1986). The TRACE model of speech perception., Cogn. Psychol. 18, 1-86.
17. Morton, J. (1969). The interaction of information in word recognition., Psychol. Rev. 76, 165-178.
18. Morton, J. (1979). Word recognition., in Structures and Processes, edited by, J. Morton, and, J. C. Marshall, (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA), pp. 108-156.
19. Norris, D. (1994). Shortlist: A connectionist model of continuous speech recognition., Cognition 52, 189-234.
20. Norris, D. (2006). The Bayesian reader: Explaining word recognition as an optimal Bayesian decision process., Psychol. Rev. 113, 327-357.
21. Nusbaum, H. C., Pisoni, D. B., and Davis, C. K. (1984). Sizing up the Hoosier mental lexicon: Measuring the familiarity of 20,000 words., Research on Speech Perception Progress Report No. 10 (Psychology Department, Indiana University, Speech Research Laboratory, Bloomington, IN), pp. 357-376.
22. Pollack, I., Rubenstein, H., and Decker, L. (1959). Intelligibility of known and unknown message sets., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 31, 273-279.
23. Recchia, G., and Jones, M. N. (2009). More data trumps smarter algorithms: Comparing pointwise mutual information with latent semantic analysis., Behav. Res. Methods 41, 647-656.
24. Savin, H. B. (1963). Word-frequency effect and errors in the perception of speech., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 35, 200-206.
25. Shaoul, C., and Westbury, C. (2011). A USENET corpus (2005-2010)., http://www.psych.ualberta.ca/∼westburylab/downloads/usenetcorpus.download. html (Last viewed 01/29/2012).
26. Shepard, R. N. (1987). Toward a universal law of generalization for psychological science., Science 237, 1317-1323.