Robust speech perception: Recognize the familiar, generalize to the similar, and adapt to the novel

Psychological Review

Volumn 122, Issue 2, 2015, Pages 148-203

  Kleinschmidt, Dave F ^a   Florian Jaeger, T ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ROCHESTER   (United States)

^b University of Rochester   (United States)

Author keywords

Adaptation; Generalization; Lack of invariance; Speech perception; Statistical learning

Indexed keywords

ADAPTIVE BEHAVIOR; HUMAN; LEARNING; PHYSIOLOGY; RECOGNITION; SPEECH PERCEPTION;

ADAPTATION, PSYCHOLOGICAL; GENERALIZATION (PSYCHOLOGY); HUMANS; RECOGNITION (PSYCHOLOGY); SPEECH PERCEPTION;

EID: 84926342672     PISSN: 0033295X     EISSN: 19391471     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/a0038695     Document Type: Article

References (236)

1. Ajmera, J., McCowan, I., & Bourlard, H. (2004). Robust speaker change detection Signal Processing Letters, IEEE, 11, 649-651.
2. Allen, J. S., & Miller, J. L. (2004a). Listener sensitivity to individual talker differences in voice-onset-time. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 115, 3171. http://dx.doi.org/10.1121/1.1701898
3. Allen, J. S., Miller, J. L., & DeSteno, D. (2003a). Individual talker differences in voice-onset-time. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 113, 544. http://dx.doi.org/10.1121/1.1528172
4. Anderson, J. R. (1990). The adaptive character of thought. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
5. Anderson, J. R. (1991). The adaptive nature of human categorization. Psychological Review, 98, 409-429. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037//0033-295X.98.3.409
6. Andruski, J. E., Blumstein, S. E., & Burton, M. (1994). The effect of subphonetic differences on lexical access Cognition, 52, 163-187.
7. Ashby, F., & Alfonso-Reese, L. A. (1995). Categorization as probability density estimation. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 39, 216-233. http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/jmps.1995.1021
8. Aslin, R. N., Saffran, J. R., & Newport, E. L. (1998). Computation of conditional probability statistics by 8-month-old infants. Psychological Science, 9, 321-324. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-9280.00063
9. Babel, M., & Munson, B. (2014). Producing socially meaningful linguistic variation. In V. Ferreira, M. Goldrick, & M. Miozzo (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of language production (pp. 308-328). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
10. Baese-Berk, M. M., Bradlow, A. R., & Wright, B. A. (2013). Accentindependent adaptation to foreign accented speech. JASA Express Letters, 133, 174-180. http://dx.doi.org/10.1121/1.4789864
11. Bard, E. G., Shillcock, R. C., & Altmann, G. T. M. (1988). The recognition of words after their acoustic offsets in spontaneous speech: Effects of subsequent context. Perception & Psychophysics, 44, 395-408. http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/BF03210424
12. Beck, J. M., Ma, W. J., Pitkow, X., Latham, P. E., & Pouget, A. (2012). Not noisy, just wrong: The role of suboptimal inference in behavioral variability. Neuron, 74, 30-39. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2012.03.016
13. Beck, J. M., Pouget, A., & Heller, K. (2012). Complex inference in neural circuits with probabilistic population codes and topic models. In P. Bartlett (Ed.), Advances in neural information processing systems (pp. 3059-3067). Red Hook, NY: Curran Associates, Inc.
14. Bejjanki, V. R., Beck, J. M., Lu, Z.-L., & Pouget, A. (2011). Perceptual learning as improved probabilistic inference in early sensory areas. Nature Neuroscience, 14, 642-648. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nn.2796
15. Bejjanki, V. R., Clayards, M., Knill, D. C., & Aslin, R. N. (2011). Cue integration in categorical tasks: Insights from audio-visual speech perception PLoS ONE, 6, e19812. http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0019812
16. Bertelson, P., Vroomen, J., & de Gelder, B. (2003). Visual recalibration of auditory speech identification: A McGurk aftereffect. Psychological Science, 14, 592-597. http://dx.doi.org/10.1046/j.0956-7976.2003.psci\_1470.x
17. Botvinick, M. M. (2012). Hierarchical reinforcement learning and decision making. Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 22, 956-962. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.conb.2012.05.008
18. Botvinick, M. M., & Plaut, D. C. (2004). Doing without schema hierarchies: A recurrent connectionist approach to normal and impaired routine sequential action. Psychological Review, 111, 395-429. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.111.2.395
19. Bouton, M. E., & King, D. A. (1983). Contextual control of the extinction of conditioned fear: Tests for the associative value of the context Journal of Experimental Psychology, 9, 248-265.
20. Bradlow, A. R., & Bent, T. (2008). Perceptual adaptation to non-native speech. Cognition, 106, 707-729. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2007.04.005
21. Brenner, N., Bialek, W., & de Ruyter Van Steveninck, R. (2000). Adaptive rescaling maximizes information transmission. Neuron, 26, 695-702. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0896-6273(00)81205-2
22. Bricker, P. D., & Pruzansky, S. (1966a). Effects of stimulus content and duration on talker identification. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 40, 1441. http://dx.doi.org/10.1121/1.1910246
23. Chambers, K. E., Onishi, K. H., & Fisher, C. (2010). A vowel is a vowel: Generalizing newly learned phonotactic constraints to new contexts. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 36, 821-828. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0018991
24. Chang, F., Dell, G. S., & Bock, K. (2006). Becoming syntactic. Psychological Review, 113, 234-272. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.113.2.234
25. Chen, S., & Gopalakrishnan, P. (1998). Speaker, environment and channel change detection and clustering via the Bayesian Information Criterion. Retrievedfrom http://www.itl.nist.gov/iad/mig/publications/proceedings/darpa98/html/bn20/bn20.htm
26. Cho, R. Y., Nystrom, L. E., Brown, E. T., Jones, A. J., Braver, T. S., Holmes, P. J., & Cohen, J. D. (2002). Mechanisms underlying dependencies of performance on stimulus history in a two-alternative forcedchoice task. Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience, 2, 283-299. http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/CABN.2.4.283
27. Clark, A. (2013). Whatever next? Predictive brains, situated agents, and the future of cognitive science. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 36, 181-204. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X12000477
28. Clarke, C. M., & Garrett, M. F. (2004a). Rapid adaptation to foreignaccented English. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 116, 3647. http://dx.doi.org/10.1121/1.1815131
29. Clarke-Davidson, C. M., Luce, P. A., & Sawusch, J. R. (2008). Does perceptual learning in speech reflect changes in phonetic category representation or decision bias? Perception & Psychophysics, 70, 604-618. http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/PP.70.4.604
30. Clayards, M. A., Tanenhaus, M. K., Aslin, R. N., & Jacobs, R. A. (2008). Perception of speech reflects optimal use of probabilistic speech cues. Cognition, 108, 804-809. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2008.04.004
31. Connine, C. M., Blasko, D. G., & Hall, M. (1991). Effects of subsequent sentence context in auditory word recognition: Temporal and linguistic constraints. Journal of Memory and Language, 30, 234-250. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0749-596X(91)90005-5
32. Courville, A. C., Daw, N. D., & Touretzky, D. S. (2006). Bayesian theories of conditioning in a changing world. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 10, 294-300. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2006.05.004
33. Creel, S. C., Aslin, R. N., & Tanenhaus, M. K. (2008). Heeding the voice of experience: The role of talker variation in lexical access. Cognition, 106, 633-664. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2007.03.013
34. Creel, S. C., & Bregman, M. R. (2011). How talker identity relates to language processing. Language and Linguistics Compass, 5, 190-204. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-818X.2011.00276.x
35. Cutler, A., Eisner, F., McQueen, J. M., & Norris, D. (2010). How abstract phonemic categories are necessary for coping with speaker-related variation. In C. Fougeron, B. Kühnert, M. D'Imperio, & N. Vallée (Eds.), Laboratory phonology 10 (pp. 91-111). Berlin, Germany: De Gruyter Mouton.
36. Dahan, D. (2010). The time course of interpretation in speech comprehension. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 19, 121-126. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0963721410364726
37. Dahan, D., Drucker, S. J., & Scarborough, R. A. (2008). Talker adaptation in speech perception: Adjusting the signal or the representations? Cognition, 108, 710-718. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2008.06.003
38. Dahan, D., Magnuson, J. S., Tanenhaus, M. K., & Hogan, E. M. (2001). Subcategorical mismatches and the time course of lexical access: Evidence for lexical competition. Language and Cognitive Processes, 16, 507-534. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01690960143000074
39. Davis, M. H., Johnsrude, I. S., Hervais-Adelman, A., Taylor, K., & McGettigan, C. (2005). Lexical information drives perceptual learning of distorted speech: Evidence from the comprehension of noise-vocoded sentences. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 134, 222-241. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.134.2.222
40. Delattre, P. C., Liberman, A. M., & Cooper, F. S. (1955a). Acoustic loci and transitional cues for consonants. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 27, 769. http://dx.doi.org/10.1121/1.1908024
41. Dell, G. S., & Chang, F. (2014a). The P-chain: Relating sentence production and its disorders to comprehension and acquisition. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London: Series B, Biological Sciences, 369, 201. http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2012.0394
42. Dell, G. S., Reed, K. D., Adams, D. R., & Meyer, A. S. (2000). Speech errors, phonotactic constraints, and implicit learning: A study of the role of experience in language production. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 26, 1355-1367. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.26.6.1355
43. Demberg, V., & Keller, F. (2008). Data from eye-tracking corpora as evidence for theories of syntactic processing complexity. Cognition, 109, 193-210. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2008.07.008
44. Dillon, B., Dunbar, E., & Idsardi, W. (2013). A single-stage approach to learning phonological categories: Insights from Inuktitut. Cognitive Science, 37, 344-377. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/cogs.12008
45. Drager, K. (2010). Sociophonetic variation in speech perception. Language and Linguistics Compass, 4, 473-480. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-818X.2010.00210.x
46. Eimas, P. D., & Corbit, J. D. (1973). Selective adaptation of linguistic feature detectors. Cognitive Psychology, 4, 99-109. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0010-0285(73)90006-6
47. Eisner, F., & McQueen, J. M. (2005). The specificity of perceptual learning in speech processing Perception & Psychophysics, 67, 224-238.
48. Eisner, F., & McQueen, J. M. (2006). Perceptual learning in speech: Stability over time. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 119, 1950-1953. http://dx.doi.org/10.1121/1.2178721
49. Elman, J. (1990). Finding structure in time Cognitive Science, 14, 179-211.
50. Ernestus, M. (2014). Acoustic reduction and the roles of abstractions and exemplars in speech processing. Lingua, 142, 27-41. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2012.12.006
51. Ernst, M. O., & Banks, M. S. (2002). Humans integrate visual and haptic information in a statistically optimal fashion. Nature, 415, 429-433. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/415429a
52. Fairhall, A. L., Lewen, G. D., Bialek, W., & de Ruyter Van Steveninck, R. R. (2001). Efficiency and ambiguity in an adaptive neural code. Nature, 412, 787-792. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/35090500
53. Farmer, T. A., Brown, M., & Tanenhaus, M. K. (2013). Prediction, explanation, and the role of generative models in language processing. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 36, 211-212. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X12002312
54. Feldman, N. H., Griffiths, T. L., Goldwater, S., & Morgan, J. L. (2013). A role for the developing lexicon in phonetic category acquisition. Psychological Review.
55. Feldman, N. H., Griffiths, T. L., & Morgan, J. L. (2009). The influence of categories on perception: Explaining the perceptual magnet effect as optimal statistical inference. Psychological Review, 116, 752-782. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0017196
56. Feldman, N. H., Myers, E. B., White, K. S., Griffiths, T. L., & Morgan, J. L. (2013). Word-level information influences phonetic learning in adults and infants Cognition, 127, 427-438.
57. Fine, A. B., Jaeger, T., Farmer, T. A., & Qian, T. (2013). rapid expectation adaptation during syntactic comprehension. PLoS ONE, 8, e77661.
58. Fine, A. B., Qian, T., Jaeger, T. F., & Jacobs, R. A. (2010). Is there syntactic adaptation in language comprehension. In J. Hale (Ed.), Proceedings of the 1st ACL Workshop on Cognitive Modeling and Computational Linguistics (pp. 18-26). Stroudsburg, PA: Association for Computational Linguistics.
59. Frank, M. C., & Goodman, N. D. (2012a). Predicting pragmatic reasoning in language games. Science, 336, 998. http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.1218633
60. Frank, M. C., Goodman, N. D., & Tenenbaum, J. B. (2009). Using speakers' referential intentions to model early cross-situational word learning. Psychological Science, 20, 578-585. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2009.02335.x
61. Frank, S. L., & Bod, R. (2011). Insensitivity of the human sentenceprocessing system to hierarchical structure. Psychological Science, 22, 829-834. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0956797611409589
62. Friston, K. J. (2005). A theory of cortical responses. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London: Series B, Biological Sciences, 360, 815-836. http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2005.1622
63. Gallistel, C. R., Mark, T. A., King, A. P., & Latham, P. E. (2001). The rat approximates an ideal detector of changes in rates of reward: Implications for the law of effect. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 27, 354.
64. Garnsey, S., Pearlmutter, N., Myers, E., & Lotocky, M. (1997). The Contributions of verb bias and plausibility to the comprehension of temporarily ambiguous sentences Journal of Memory and Language, 37, 58-93.
65. Gauvain, J.-L., & Lee, C.-H. (1994). Maximum a posteriori estimation for multivariate Gaussian mixture observations of Markov chains IEEE Transactions on Speech and Audio Processing, 2, 291-298.
66. Gelman, A., Carlin, J. B., Stern, H. S., & Rubin, D. B. (2003). Bayesian Data Analysis (second ed.). New York, NY: Taylor & Francis.
67. Gibson, B. R., Rogers, T. T., & Zhu, X. (2013). Human semi-supervised learning. Topics in Cognitive Science, 5, 132-172. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/tops.12010
68. 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. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.22.5.1166
69. Goldinger, S. D. (1998). Echoes of echoes? An episodic theory of lexical access Psychological Review, 105, 251-279.
70. Goldinger, S. D. (2007). A complementary-systems approach to abstract and episodic speech perception. Saarbrucken, Germany: ICPHS.
71. Goldrick, M. (2004). Phonological features and phonotactic constraints in speech production Journal of Memory and Language, 51, 586-603.
72. Gómez, R., & Gerken, L. (2000). Infant artificial language learning and language acquisition Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4, 178-186.
73. Goodman, N. D., & Stuhlmüller, A. (2013). Knowledge and implicature: Modeling language understanding as social cognition. Topics in Cognitive Science, 5, 173-184. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/tops.12007
74. Griffiths, T. L., Chater, N., Kemp, C., Perfors, A., & Tenenbaum, J. B. (2010). Probabilistic models of cognition: Exploring representations and inductive biases. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 14, 357-364. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2010.05.004
75. Griffiths, T. L., Sanborn, A. N., Canini, K. R., & Navarro, D. J. (2008). Categorization as nonparametric Bayesian density estimation. In M. Oaksford & N. Chater (Eds.), The probabilistic mind: Prospects for rational models of cognition (pp. 303-328). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
76. Griffiths, T. L., Vul, E., & Sanborn, a. N. (2012). Bridging levels of analysis for probabilistic models of cognition. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 21, 263-268. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0963721412447619
77. Grodner, D., & Sedivy, J. C. (2011). The effect of speaker-specific information on pragmatic inferences. In E. A. Gibson & N. J. Pearlmutter (Eds.), The processing and acquisition of reference (pp. 239-272). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
78. Grosjean, F. (1985). The recognition of words after their acoustic offset: Evidence and implications. Perception & Psychophysics, 38, 299-310. http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/BF03207159
79. Guediche, S., Blumstein, S. E., Fiez, J. A., & Holt, L. L. (2014a). Speech perception under adverse conditions: Insights from behavioral, computational, and neuroscience research. Frontiers in Systems Neuroscience, 7, 126. http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fnsys.2013.00126
80. Gutfreund, Y. (2012). Stimulus-specific adaptation, habituation and change detection in the gaze control system. Biological Cybernetics, 106, 657-668. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00422-012-0497-3
81. Hale, J. (2001). A probabilistic earley parser as a psycholinguistic model. In K. Knight (Ed.), Second meeting of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics on Language Technologies (Vol. 2, pp. 1-8). Stroudsburg, PA: Association for Computational Linguistics. http://dx.doi.org/10.3115/1073336.1073357
82. Hanulíková, A., van Alphen, P. M., van Goch, M. M., & Weber, A. (2012). When one person's mistake is another's standard usage: The effect of foreign accent on syntactic processing. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 24, 878-887. http://dx.doi.org/10.1162/jocn\_a\_00103
83. Harris, H., Gliksberg, M., & Sagi, D. (2012). Generalized perceptual learning in the absence of sensory adaptation. Current Biology, 22, 1813-1817. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2012.07.059
84. Hay, J., & Drager, K. (2010). Stuffed toys and speech perception. Linguistics, 48, 865-892. http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/ling.2010.027
85. Hay, J., Warren, P., & Drager, K. (2006). Factors influencing speech perception in the context of a merger-in-progress. Journal of Phonetics, 34, 458-484. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.wocn.2005.10.001
86. Heid, S., & Hawkins, S. (2000). An acoustical study of long-domain /r/ and /l/ coarticulation. In P. Hoole (Ed.), Proceedings of the 5th Seminar on Speech Production: Models and Data (pp. 77-80). Munich, Germany: SPS5.
87. Hillenbrand, J., Getty, L. A., Clark, M. J., & Wheeler, K. (1995). Acoustic characteristics of American English vowels The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 97, 3099-3111.
88. Hinton, G. E. (2007). Learning multiple layers of representation. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 11, 428-434. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2007.09.004
89. Huang, J., & Holt, L. L. (2012a). Listening for the norm: Adaptive coding in speech categorization. Frontiers in Psychology, 3, 10. http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00010
90. Huang, Y., & Rao, R. P. N. (2011). Predictive coding. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Cognitive Science, 2, 580-593. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/wcs.142
91. Idemaru, K., & Holt, L. L. (2011). Word recognition reflects dimensionbased statistical learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 37, 1939-1956. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0025641
92. Jacobs, R. A. (2002). What determines visual cue reliability?. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 6, 345-350.
93. Jaeger, T. F. (2008). Categorical data analysis: Away from ANOVAs (transformation or not) and towards Logit Mixed Models. Journal of Memory and Language, 59, 434-446. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2007.11.007
94. Jaeger, T. F. (2013a). Production preferences cannot be understood without reference to communication. Frontiers in Psychology, 4, 230. http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00230
95. Jaeger, T. F., & Ferreira, V. S. (2013). Seeking predictions from a predictive framework. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 36, 359-360. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X12002762
96. Jaeger, T. F., & Snider, N. E. (2013). Alignment as a consequence of expectation adaptation: Syntactic priming is affected by the prime's prediction error given both prior and recent experience. Cognition, 127, 57-83. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2012.10.013
97. Johnson, K. (1997a). The auditory/perceptual basis for speech segmentation OSU Working Papers in Linguistics, 50, 101-113.
98. Johnson, K. (1997b). Speech perception without speaker normalization: An exemplar model. In K. Johnson & J. W. Mullennix (Eds.), Talker variability in speech processing (pp. 145-165). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
99. Johnson, K. (2006). Resonance in an exemplar-based lexicon: The emergence of social identity and phonology. Journal of Phonetics, 34, 485-499. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.wocn.2005.08.004
100. Johnson, K. (2013, April). Factors that affect phonetic adaptation: Exemplar filters and sound change. Talk presented at the Workshop on Current Issues and Methods in Speaker Adaptation, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH.
101. Johnson, K., Strand, E. A., & D'Imperio, M. (1999). Auditory-visual integration of talker gender in vowel perception. Journal of Phonetics, 27, 359-384. http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/jpho.1999.0100
102. Jongman, A., Wayland, R., & Wong, S. (2000a). Acoustic characteristics of English fricatives. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 108, 1252. http://dx.doi.org/10.1121/1.1288413
103. Kamide, Y. (2012). Learning individual talkers' structural preferences. Cognition, 124, 66-71. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2012.03.001
104. Kaschak, M. P., & Glenberg, A. M. (2004). This construction needs learned. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 133, 450-467. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.133.3.450
105. Kersten, D., Mamassian, P., & Yuille, A. (2004). Object perception as Bayesian inference. Annual Review of Psychology, 55, 271-304. http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.55.090902.142005
106. Kleinschmidt, D. F., Fine, A. B., & Jaeger, T. F. (2012). A belief-updating model of adaptation and cue combination in syntactic comprehension. In N. Miyake, D. Peebles, & R. P. Cooper (Eds.), Proceedings of the 34th annual conference of the cognitive science society (pp. 599-604). Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society.
107. Kleinschmidt, D. F., & Jaeger, T. F. (2015). A re-evaluation of selective adaptation. Manuscript submitted for publication.
108. Knill, D. C., & Saunders, J. A. (2003). Do humans optimally integrate stereo and texture information for judgments of surface slant? Vision Research, 43, 2539-2558. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0042-6989(03)00458-9
109. Knudsen, E. I. (1998). Capacity for plasticity in the adult owl auditory system expanded by juvenile experience. Science, 279, 1531-1533. http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.279.5356.1531
110. Kohn, A. (2007). Visual adaptation: Physiology, mechanisms, and functional benefits. Journal of Neurophysiology, 97, 3155-3164. http://dx.doi.org/10.1152/jn.00086.2007
111. Körding, K. P., Beierholm, U., Ma, W. J., Quartz, S., Tenenbaum, J. B., & Shams, L. (2007). Causal inference in multisensory perception PLoS ONE, 2, e943. http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0000943
112. Körding, K. P., Tenenbaum, J. B., & Shadmehr, R. (2007). The dynamics of memory as a consequence of optimal adaptation to a changing body. Nature Neuroscience, 10, 779-786. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nn1901
113. Kraljic, T., & Samuel, A. G. (2005). Perceptual learning for speech: Is there a return to normal? Cognitive Psychology, 51, 141-178. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cogpsych.2005.05.001
114. Kraljic, T., & Samuel, A. G. (2006). Generalization in perceptual learning for speech Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 13, 262-268.
115. Kraljic, T., & Samuel, A. G. (2007). Perceptual adjustments to multiple speakers. Journal of Memory and Language, 56, 1-15. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2006.07.010
116. Kraljic, T., Samuel, A. G., & Brennan, S. E. (2008). First impressions and last resorts: How listeners adjust to speaker variability. Psychological Science, 19, 332-338. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02090.x
117. Kronrod, Y., Coppess, E., & Feldman, N. H. (2012). A unified model of categorical effects in consonant and vowel perception. In N. Miyake, D. Peebles, & R. P. Cooper (Eds.), Proceedings of the 34th annual conference of the cognitive science society (pp. 629-634). Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society.
118. Kurumada, C., Brown, M., Bibyk, S., Pontillo, D. F., & Tanenhaus, M. K. (2013). Incremental processing in the pragmatic interpretation of contrastive prosody. In M. Knauff, M. Pauen, N. Sebanz, & I. Wachsmuth (Eds.), Proceedings of the 35th annual conference of the cognitive science society (pp. 846-51). Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society.
119. Kurumada, C., Brown, M., Bibyk, S., Pontillo, F., & Tanenhaus, M. K. (2014). Rapid adaptation in online pragmatic interpretation of contrastive prosody. In P. Bello, M. McShane, & B. Scassellati (Eds.), Proceedings of the 36th annual meeting of the cognitive science society (pp. 791-796). Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society.
120. Kurumada, C., Brown, M., & Tanenhaus, M. K. (2012). Pragmatic interpretation of contrastive prosody: It looks like speech adaptation. In N. Miyake, D. Peebles, & R. P. Cooper (Eds.), Proceedings of the 34th annual conference of the cognitive science society (pp. 647-652). Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society.
121. Labov, W. (1972). Sociolinguistic patterns. State College, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.
122. Lancia, L., & Winter, B. (2013). The interaction between competition, learning, and habituation dynamics in speech perception. Laboratory Phonology, 4, 221-258. http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/lp-2013-00
123. Leggetter, C., & Woodland, P. (1995). Maximum likelihood linear regression for speaker adaptation of continuous density hidden Markov models. Computer Speech & Language, 9, 171-185. http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/csla.1995.0010
124. Levy, R. (2008a). Expectation-based syntactic comprehension Cognition, 106, 1126-1177. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2007.05.006
125. Levy, R. (2008b). A noisy-channel model of rational human sentence comprehension under uncertain input. In S. Padó (Ed.), Proceedings of the 2008 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (pp. 234-243). Stroudsburg, PA: Association for Computational Linguistics.
126. Levy, R., Bicknell, K., Slattery, T., & Rayner, K. (2009). Eye movement evidence that readers maintain and act on uncertainty about past linguistic input. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 106, 21086-21090. http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0907664106
127. Liberman, A. M., Cooper, F. S., Shankweiler, D. P., & Studdert-Kennedy, M. (1967). Perception of the speech code Psychological Review, 74, 431-461.
128. Linkenhoker, B. A., von der Ohe, C. G., & Knudsen, E. I. (2005). Anatomical traces of juvenile learning in the auditory system of adult barn owls. Nature neuroscience, 8, 93-98. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nn1367
129. Lisker, L., & Abramson, A. (1964). A cross-language study of voicing in initial stops: Acoustical measurements Word, 20, 384-422.
130. Ma, W. J., Beck, J. M., Latham, P. E., & Pouget, A. (2006). Bayesian inference with probabilistic population codes. Nature Neuroscience, 9, 1432-1438. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nn1790
131. MacDonald, M. C. (2013a). How language production shapes language form and comprehension. Frontiers in Psychology, 4, 226. http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00226
132. MacDonald, M. C., Pearlmutter, N. J., & Seidenberg, M. S. (1994). Lexical nature of syntactic ambiguity resolution Psychological Review, 101, 676-703.
133. MacKay, D. J. C. (2003). Information theory, inference, and learning algorithms (3rd ed.). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
134. Magnuson, J. S., & Nusbaum, H. C. (2007). Acoustic differences, listener expectations, and the perceptual accommodation of talker variability. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 33, 391-409. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.33.2.391
135. Marr, D. (1982). Vision: A computational investigation into the human representation and processing of visual information. New York, NY: Henry Holt and Co., Inc.
136. Marslen-Wilson, W., & Warren, P. (1994). Levels of perceptual representation and process in lexical access: Words, phonemes, and features. Psychological Review, 101, 653-675. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.101.4.653
137. Massaro, D. W. (1987). Speech perception by ear and eye: A paradigm for psychological inquiry. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum Associates.
138. Massaro, D. W. (2004). From multisensory integration to talking heads and language learning. In G. Calvert, C. Spence, & B. E. Stein (Eds.), The handbook of multisensory processes (pp. 153-176). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
139. Maye, J., Aslin, R. N., & Tanenhaus, M. (2008). The Weckud Wetch of the Wast: Lexical Adaptation to a Novel Accent. Cognitive Science, 32, 543-562. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03640210802035357
140. Maye, J., Werker, J. F., & Gerken, L. (2002). Infant sensitivity to distributional information can affect phonetic discrimination. Cognition, 82, B101-111.
141. McClelland, J. L., & Elman, J. L. (1986). The TRACE model of speech perception. Cognitive Psychology, 18, 1-86. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0010-0285(86)90015-0
142. McGurk, H., & MacDonald, J. (1976). Hearing lips and seeing voices. Nature, 264, 746-748. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/264746a0
143. 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. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.29.4.539
144. McMurray, B., Aslin, R. N., & Toscano, J. C. (2009). Statistical learning of phonetic categories: Insights from a computational approach. Developmental Science, 12, 369-378. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-7687.2009.00822.x
145. 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. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0022325
146. McMurray, B., Tanenhaus, M. K., & Aslin, R. N. (2002). Gradient effects of within-category phonetic variation on lexical access. Cognition, 86, B33-42.
147. McQueen, J. M., Cutler, A., & Norris, D. (2006). Phonological abstraction in the mental lexicon. Cognitive Science, 30, 1113-1126. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog0000\_79
148. McQueen, J. M., Norris, D., & Cutler, A. (1999). Lexical influence in phonetic decision making: Evidence from subcategorical mismatches. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 25, 1363-1389. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037//0096-1523.25.5.1363
149. Miller, J. L., Connine, C. M., Schermer, T. M., & Kluender, K. R. (1983). A possible auditory basis for internal structure of phonetic categories The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 73, 2124-2133.
150. Mirman, D., McClelland, J. L., & Holt, L. L. (2006). An interactive Hebbian account of lexically guided tuning of speech perception Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 13, 958-965.
151. Mitterer, H., & Reinisch, E. (2013). No delays in application of perceptual learning in speech recognition: Evidence from eye tracking. Journal of Memory and Language, 69, 527-545. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2013.07.002
152. Munson, B. (2007). The acoustic correlates of perceived masculinity, perceived femininity, and perceived sexual orientation. Language and Speech, 50, 125-142. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/00238309070500010601
153. Munson, B. (2011). The influence of actual and imputed talker gender on fricative perception, revisited (L). The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 130, 2631-2634. http://dx.doi.org/10.1121/1.3641410
154. Munson, C. M. (2011). Perceptual learning in speech reveals pathways of processing. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Iowa.
155. Neal, R. M. (2003). Slice sampling Annals of statistics, 31, 705-741.
156. Nearey, T. M. (1997). Speech perception as pattern recognition The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 101, 3241-3254.
157. Nearey, T. M., & Assman, P. F. (1986a). Modeling the role of inherent spectral change in vowel identification. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 80, 1297. http://dx.doi.org/10.1121/1.394433
158. Newman, R. S., Clouse, S. A., & Burnham, J. L. (2001). The perceptual consequences of within-talker variability in fricative production. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 109, 1181-1196. http://dx.doi.org/10.1121/1.1348009
159. Niedzielski, N. (1999). The effect of social information on the perception of sociolinguistic variables. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 18, 62-85. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0261927X99018001005
160. Norris, D. (1994). Shortlist: A connectionist model of continuous speech recognition. Cognition, 52, 189-234. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(94)90043-4
161. Norris, D., & McQueen, J. M. (2008). Shortlist B: A Bayesian model of continuous speech recognition. Psychological Review, 115, 357-395. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.115.2.357
162. Norris, D., McQueen, J. M., & Cutler, A. (2000). Merging information in speech recognition: Feedback is never necessary The Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 23, 299-325.
163. Norris, D., McQueen, J. M., & Cutler, A. (2003). Perceptual learning in speech. Cognitive Psychology, 47, 204-238. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0010-0285(03)00006-9
164. Nygaard, L. C., & Pisoni, D. B. (1998). Talker-specific learning in speech perception Perception & Psychophysics, 60, 355-376.
165. Oden, G. C., & Massaro, D. W. (1978). Integration of featural information in speech perception. Psychological Review, 85, 172-191. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.85.3.172
166. O'Donnell, T. J., Snedeker, J., Tenenbaum, J. B., & Goodman, N. D. (2011). Productivity and reuse in language. In L. Carlson, C. Hoelscher, & T. F. Shipley (Eds.), Proceedings of the 33rd annual conference of the cognitive science society (pp. 1613-8). Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society.
167. Pajak, B., Fine, A. B., Kleinschmidt, D. F., & Jaeger, T. F. (2014). Learning additional languages as hierarchical inference: Insights from L1 processing. Language Learning. Manuscript submitted for publication.
168. Pajak, B., & Levy, R. (2011). Phonological generalization from distributional evidence. In L. Carlson, C. Hoelscher, & T. F. Shipley (Eds.), Proceedings of the 33rd annual conference of the cognitive science society (pp. 2673-2678). Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society.
169. 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.
170. Pardo, J. S., & Remez, R. E. (2006). The perception of speech. In M. Traxler & M. A. Gernsbacher (Eds.), The handbook of psycholinguisitcs (2nd ed., pp. 201-248). New York, NY: Academic Press.
171. Perfors, A., Tenenbaum, J. B., & Regier, T. (2011). The learnability of abstract syntactic principles. Cognition, 118, 306-338. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2010.11.001
172. Peterson, G. E. (1952a). Control methods used in a study of the vowels. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 24, 175. http://dx.doi.org/10.1121/1.1906875
173. Pickering, M. J., & Garrod, S. (2013). An integrated theory of language production and comprehension. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 36, 329-347. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X12001495
174. Pierrehumbert, J. B. (2002). Word-specific phonetics. Laboratory Phonology, 1-24.
175. Pierrehumbert, J. B. (2003). Phonetic diversity, statistical learning, and acquisition of phonology Language and Speech, 46, 115-154.
176. Pierrehumbert, J. B. (2006). The next toolkit. Journal of Phonetics, 34, 516-530. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.wocn.2006.06.003
177. Pisoni, D. B., & Levi, S. V. (2007). 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.
178. Pisoni, D. B., & Tash, J. (1974). Reaction times to comparisons within and across phonetic categories Perception & Psychophysics, 15, 285-290.
179. Qian, T., & Aslin, R. N. (2014). Learning bundles of stimuli renders stimulus order as a cue, not a confound. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111, 14400-14405. http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1416109111
180. Qian, T., Jaeger, T. F., & Aslin, R. N. (2012a). Learning to represent a multi-context environment: More than detecting changes. Frontiers in Psychology, 3, 228. http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00228
181. Qian, T., Jaeger, T. F., & Aslin, R. N. (2015). Incremental implicit learning of bundles of statistical patterns. Manuscript submitted for publication.
182. Rao, R. P. N., & Ballard, D. H. (1999). Predictive coding in the visual cortex: A functional interpretation of some extra-classical receptive-field effects. Nature Neuroscience, 2, 79-87. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/4580
183. Reinisch, E., & Holt, L. L. (2014). Lexically guided phonetic retuning of foreign-accented speech and its generalization. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 40, 539-555. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0034409
184. Remez, R. E., Fellowes, J. M., & Rubin, P. E. (1997). Talker identification based on phonetic information. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 23, 651-666. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.23.3.651
185. Roberts, M., & Summerfield, Q. (1981). Audiovisual presentation demonstrates that selective adaptation in speech perception is purely auditory Perception & Psychophysics, 30, 309-314.
186. Saffran, J. R., Aslin, R., & Newport, E. (1996). Statistical learning by 8-month-old infants Science, 274, 1926-1928.
187. Saffran, J. R., Newport, E. L., & Aslin, R. N. (1996). Word segmentation: The role of distributional cues. Journal of Memory and Language, 35, 606-621. http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/jmla.1996.0032
188. Saldaña, H. M., & Rosenblum, L. D. (1994). Selective adaptation in speech perception using a compelling audiovisual adaptor The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 95, 3658-3661.
189. Salverda, A. P., Kleinschmidt, D. F., & Tanenhaus, M. K. (2014). Immediate effects of anticipatory coarticulation in spoken-word recognition. Journal of Memory and Language, 71, 145-163. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2013.11.002
190. Samuel, A. G. (1986). Red herring detectors and speech perception: In defense of selective adaptation Cognitive Psychology, 18, 452-499.
191. Samuel, A. G. (2001). Knowing a word affects the fundamental perception of the sounds within it. Psychological Science, 12, 348-351. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-9280.00364
192. Samuel, A. G., & Kat, D. (1996). Early levels of analysis of speech. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 22, 676.
193. Sanborn, A. N., Griffiths, T. L., & Navarro, D. J. (2010). Rational approximations to rational models: Alternative algorithms for category learning. Psychological Review, 117, 1144-1167. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0020511
194. Sawusch, J. R. (1977). Peripheral and central processes in selective adaptation of place of articulation in stop consonants The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 62, 738-750.
195. Sharpee, T. O., Sugihara, H., Kurgansky, A. V., Rebrik, S. P., Stryker, M. P., & Miller, K. D. (2006). Adaptive filtering enhances information transmission in visual cortex. Nature, 439, 936-942. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nature04519
196. Sheffert, S. M., Pisoni, D. B., Fellowes, J. M., & Remez, R. E. (2002). Learning to recognize talkers from natural, sinewave, and reversed speech samples. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 28, 1447-1469. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037//0096-1523.28.6.1447
197. Shi, L., Griffiths, T. L., Feldman, N. H., & Sanborn, A. N. (2010). Exemplar models as a mechanism for performing Bayesian inference. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 17, 443-464. http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/PBR.17.4.443
198. Shinoda, K., & Lee, C.-H. (2001). A structural Bayes approach to speaker adaptation. IEEE Transactions on Speech and Audio Processing, 9, 276-287. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/89.906001
199. Sidaras, S. K., Alexander, J. E. D., & Nygaard, L. C. (2009). Perceptual learning of systematic variation in Spanish-accented speech. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 125, 3306-3316. http://dx.doi.org/10.1121/1.3101452
200. Sidaras, S. K., & Nygaard, L. C. (2014). Illusory vocal accommodation as a function of expected age of the speaker. Manuscript submitted for publication.
201. Simmons, J. P., Nelson, L. D., & Simonsohn, U. (2011). False-positive psychology: Undisclosed flexibility in data collection and analysis allows presenting anything as significant. Psychological Science. Advance online publication. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0956797611417632
202. Sissons, H. T., & Miller, R. R. (2009). Spontaneous recovery of excitation and inhibition. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 35, 419-426. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0014815
203. Smith, N. J., & Levy, R. (2013). The effect of word predictability on reading time is logarithmic. Cognition, 128, 302-319. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2013.02.013
204. Smits, R. (2001). Hierarchical categorization of coarticulated phonemes: A theoretical analysis. Perception & Psychophysics, 63, 1109-1139. http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/BF03194529
205. Sonderegger, M., & Yu, A. (2010). A rational account of perceptual compensation for coarticulation. In S. Ohlsson & R. Catrambone (Eds.), Proceedings of the 32nd annual conference of the cognitive science society (pp. 375-380). Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society.
206. Staub, A., & Clifton, C. (2006). Syntactic prediction in language comprehension: Evidence from either . . . or. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 32, 425-436. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.32.2.425
207. Staum Casasanto, L. (2008). Does social information influence sentence processing? In B. C. Love, K. McRae, & V. M. Sloutsky (Eds.), Proceedings of the 30th annual conference of the cognitive science society (pp. 799-804). Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society.
208. Stocker, A. A., & Simoncelli, E. P. (2006). Sensory adaptation within a bayesian framework for perception. In Y. Weiss, B. Schölkoph, & J. Platt (Eds.), Advances in neural information processing systems (Vol. 18, pp. 1291-1298). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
209. Strand, E. A. (1999). Uncovering the role of gender stereotypes in speech perception. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 18, 86-100. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0261927X99018001006
210. Strand, E. A., & Johnson, K. (1996). Gradient and visual speaker normalization in the perception of fricatives. In D. Gibbons (Ed.), Natural language processing and speech technology: Results of the 3rd KONVENS Conference, Bielfelt (pp. 14-26). Berlin, Germany: Mouton de Gruyter.
211. Strange, W. (1989a). Evolving theories of vowel perception. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 85, 2081. http://dx.doi.org/10.1121/1.397860
212. Sumner, M. (2011). The role of variation in the perception of accented speech. Cognition, 119, 131-136. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2010.10.018
213. Sussman, H. M., Fruchter, D., Hilbert, J., & Sirosh, J. (1998). Linear correlates in the speech signal: The orderly output constraint Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 21, 241-259.
214. Tanenhaus, M. K., Spivey-Knowlton, M. J., Eberhard, K. M., & Sedivy, J. C. (1995). Integration of visual and linguistic information in spoken language comprehension Science, 268, 1632-1634.
215. Tenenbaum, J. B., & Griffiths, T. L. (2001). Generalization, similarity, and Bayesian inference. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 24, 629-640; discussion 652-791.
216. Thanellou, A., & Green, J. T. (2011). Spontaneous recovery but not reinstatement of the extinguished conditioned eyeblink response in the rat. Behavioral Neuroscience, 125, 613-625. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0023582
217. Toscano, J. C., & McMurray, B. (2010). Cue integration with categories: Weighting acoustic cues in speech using unsupervised learning and distributional statistics. Cognitive Science, 34, 434-464. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1551-6709.2009.01077.x
218. Toscano, J. C., Munson, C. M., Kleinschmidt, D. F., & Jaeger, T. F. (2015). A single mechanism for language acquisition and perceptual learning. Manuscript submitted for publication.
219. Trueswell, J. C., & Tanenhaus, M. K. (1994). Semantic influences on parsing: Use of thematic role information in syntactic ambiguity resolution Journal of Memory and Language, 33, 285-318.
220. Tunley, A. (1999). Coarticulatory influences of liquids on vowels in English Alison. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Cambridge.
221. Tzeng, C. Y., Alexander, J. E. D., Sidaras, S. K., & Nygaard, L. C. (2014). The role of training structure in perceptual learning of accented speech. Manuscript submitted for publication.
222. Vallabha, G. K., McClelland, J. L., Pons, F., Werker, J. F., & Amano, S. (2007). Unsupervised learning of vowel categories from infant-directed speech. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 104, 13273-13278. http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0705369104
223. van den Bosch, A., & Daelemans, W. (2013). Implicit schemata and categories in memory-based language processing. Language and Speech, 56, 309-328. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0023830913484902
224. Van Wassenhove, V., Grant, K. W., & Poeppel, D. (2005). Visual speech speeds up the neural processing of auditory speech. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 102, 1181-1186. http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0408949102
225. Vatakis, A., & Spence, C. (2007). Crossmodal binding: Evaluating the "unity assumption" using audiovisual speech stimuli Perception & Psychophysics, 69, 744-756.
226. Vitevitch, M. S., & Luce, P. A. (2004). A web-based interface to calculate phonotactic probability for words and nonwords in English Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 36, 481-487.
227. Vroomen, J., van Linden, S., de Gelder, B., & Bertelson, P. (2007). Visual recalibration and selective adaptation in auditory-visual speech perception: Contrasting build-up courses. Neuropsychologia, 45, 572-577. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2006.01.031
228. Vroomen, J., van Linden, S., Keetels, M., de Gelder, B., & Bertelson, P. (2004). Selective adaptation and recalibration of auditory speech by lipread information: Dissipation. Speech Communication, 44, 55-61. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.specom.2004.03.009
229. Warker, J. A., & Dell, G. S. (2006). Speech errors reflect newly learned phonotactic constraints. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 32, 387-398. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.32.2.387
230. Webster, M. A., Werner, J. S., & Field, D. J. (2005). Adaptation and the phenomenology of perception. In C. Clifford & G. Rhodes (Eds.), Fitting the mind to the world: Adaptation and after-effects in high-level vision (advances in visual cognition) (Vol. 2, pp. 241-277). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
231. Wells, J. B., Christiansen, M. H., Race, D. S., Acheson, D. J., & MacDonald, M. C. (2009). Experience and sentence processing: Statistical learning and relative clause comprehension. Cognitive Psychology, 58, 250-271. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cogpsych.2008.08.002
232. Whalen, D. H. (1984). Subcategorical phonetic mismatches slow phonetic judgments Perception & Psychophysics, 35, 49-64.
233. White, K. S., & Aslin, R. N. (2011). Adaptation to novel accents by toddlers. Developmental Science, 14, 372-384. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-7687.2010.00986.x
234. Wonnacott, E., Newport, E. L., & Tanenhaus, M. K. (2008). Acquiring and processing verb argument structure: Distributional learning in a miniature language. Cognitive Psychology, 56, 165-209. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cogpsych.2007.04.002
235. Yildirim, I., Degen, J., Tanenhaus, M. K., & Jaeger, T. F. (2013). Linguistic variability and adaptation in quantifier meanings. In M. Knauff, M. Pauen, N. Sebanz, & I. Wachsmuth (Eds.), Proceedings of the 35th annual conference of the cognitive science society (pp. 3835-3840). Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society.
236. Zhu, X., Rogers, T., Qian, R., & Kalish, C. (2007). Humans perform semi-supervised classification too. In A. Cohn (Ed.), Proceedings of the 22nd AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence (pp. 864-869). Menlo Park, CA: AAAI Press.