The time-course of speaking rate compensation: effects of sentential rate and vowel length on voicing judgments

Language, Cognition and Neuroscience

Volumn 30, Issue 5, 2015, Pages 529-543

  Toscano, Joseph C ^a   McMurray, Bob ^b  

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

^b E11 SSH   (United States)

Author keywords

context effects; speaking rate; speech perception; spoken word recognition; visual world paradigm

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; ASSOCIATION; AUDITORY STIMULATION; AUDITORY SYSTEM EXAMINATION; CLICK; DECISION MAKING; EYE MOVEMENT; HUMAN; JACKKNIFE TEST; LANGUAGE; PHONETICS; PREDICTION; SPEECH; SPEECH RATE; VISUAL STIMULATION; VOICE ANALYSIS;

EID: 84938343163     PISSN: 23273798     EISSN: 23273801     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/23273798.2014.946427     Document Type: Article

References (71)

1. J.S.Allen,, & J.L.Miller, (1999). Effects of syllable-initial voicing and speaking rate on the temporal characteristics of monosyllabic words. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 106, 2031–2039. doi:10.1121/1.427949
2. J.S.Allen,, J.L.Miller,, & D.DeSteno, (2003). Individual talker differences in voice-onset-time. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 113, 544–552. doi:10.1121/1.1528172
3. P.D.Allopenna,, J.S.Magnuson,, & M.K.Tanenhaus, (1998). Tracking the time course of spoken word recognition using eye movements: Evidence for continuous mapping models. Journal of Memory and Language, 38, 419–439. doi:10.1006/jmla.1997.2558
4. G.T.M.Altmann,, & Y.Kamide, (1999). Incremental interpretation at verbs: Restricting the domain of subsequent reference. Cognition, 73, 247–264. doi:10.1016/S0010-0277(99)00059-1
5. K.S.Apfelbaum,, S.E.Blumstein,, & B.McMurray, (2011). Semantic priming is affected by real-time phonological competition: Evidence for continuous cascading systems. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 18(1), 141–149. doi:10.3758/s13423-010-0039-8
6. K.S.Apfelbaum,, N.Bullock-Rest,, A.Rhone,, A.Jongman,, & B.McMurray, (2013). Contingent categorization in speech perception. Language Cognitive Processes. doi:10.1080/01690965.2013.824995
7. J.Beckman,, P.Helgason,, B.McMurray,, & C.Ringen, (2011). Rate effects on Swedish VOT: Evidence for phonological overspecification. Journal of Phonetics, 39(1), 39–49. doi:10.1016/j.wocn.2010.11.001
8. P.Boersma,, & D.Weenink, (2010). Praat: Doing phonetics by computer. Retrieved February 11, 2013, from http://www.praat.org/.
9. V.J.Boucher, (2002). Timing relations in speech and the identification of voice-onset times: A stable perceptual boundary for voicing categories across speaking rates. Perception and Psychophysics, 64(1), 121–130. doi:10.3758/BF03194561
10. L.A.Christovich,, & V.V.Lublinskaya, (1979). The ‘center of gravity’ effect in vowel spectra and critical distance between the formants: Psychoacoustical study of the perception of vowel-like stimuli. Hearing Research, 1, 185–195. doi:10.1016/0378-5955(79)90012-1
11. J.Cole,, G.Linebaugh,, C.Munson,, & B.McMurray, (2010). Unmasking the acoustic effects of vowel-to-vowel coarticulation: A statistical modeling approach. Journal of Phonetics, 38, 167–184. doi:10.1016/j.wocn.2009.08.004
12. D.Dahan,, J.S.Magnuson,, & M.K.Tanenhaus, (2001). Time course of frequency effects in spoken-word recognition: Evidence from eye movements. Cognitive Psychology, 42, 317–367. doi:10.1006/cogp.2001.0750
13. P.Denes, (1955). Effect of duration on the perception of voicing. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 27, 761–764. doi:10.1121/1.1908020
14. R.L.Diehl,, & K.R.Kluender, (1989). On the objects of speech perception. Ecological Psychology, 1(2), 121–144. doi:10.1207/s15326969eco0102_2
15. M.E.Galle, (2014). Integration of asynchronous cues in fricative perception in real-time and developmental-time (Doctoral dissertation). University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, USA.
16. G.M.Gaskell,, & W.D.Marslen-Wilson, (1996). Phonological variation and inference in lexical access. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 22, 144–158. doi:10.1037/0096-1523.22.1.144
17. S.D.Goldinger, (1998). Echoes of echoes? An episodic theory of lexical access. Psychological Review, 105, 251–279. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.105.2.251
18. L.L.Holt, (2005). Temporally nonadjacent nonlinguistic sounds affect speech categorization. Psychological Science, 16, 305–312. doi:10.1111/j.0956-7976.2005.01532.x
19. K.Johnson, (1997). Speech perception without speaker normalization: An exemplar model. In K.Johnson & J.W.Mullenix (Eds.), Talker variability in speech processing (pp. 145–165). London: Academic Press.
20. R.H.Kessinger,, & S.E.Blumstein, (1997). Effects of speaking rate on voice-onset time in Thai, French, and English. Journal of Phonetics, 25(2), 143–168. doi:10.1006/jpho.1996.0039
21. R.H.Kessinger,, & S.E.Blumstein, (1998). Effects of speaking rate on voice-onset time and vowel production: Some implications for perception studies. Journal of Phonetics, 26(2), 117–128. doi:10.1006/jpho.1997.0069
22. K.R.Kluender,, J.A.Coady,, & M.Kiefte, (2003). Sensitivity to change in perception of speech. Speech Communication, 41(1), 59–69. doi:10.1016/S0167-6393(02)00093-6
23. L.Lisker,, & A.Abramson, (1964). A cross-linguistic study of voicing in initial stops: Acoustical measurements. Word, 20, 384–422.
24. A.J.Lotto,, & K.R.Kluender, (1998). General contrast effects in speech perception: Effect of preceding liquid on stop consonant identification. Perception and Psychophysics, 60, 602–619. doi:10.3758/BF03206049
25. J.Magloire,, & K.P.Green, (1999). A cross-language comparison of speaking rate effects on the production of voice onset time in English and Spanish. Phonetica, 56, 158–185. doi:10.1159/000028449
26. W.Marslen-Wilson, (1990). Activation, competition, and frequency in lexical access. In G.Altmann (Ed.), Cognitive models of speech processing: psycholinguistic and computational perspectives (pp. 148–172). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
27. W.Marslen-Wilson,, & P.Zwitserlood, (1989). Accessing spoken words: The importance of word onsets. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 15, 576–585. doi:10.1037/0096-1523.15.3.576
28. D.Massaro,, & M.Cohen, (1983). Consonant/vowel ratio: An improbable cue in speech. Perception & Psychophysics, 33, 501–505. doi:10.3758/bf03202904
29. J.L.McClelland,, & D.E.Rumelhart, (1981). An interactive activation model of context effects in letter perception: Part 1. An account of basic findings. Psychological Review, 88, 375–407. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.88.5.375
30. B.McMurray,, R.N.Aslin,, M.K.Tanenhaus,, M.J.Spivey,, & D.Subik, (2008). Gradient sensitivity to within-category variation in speech: Implications for categorical perception. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 34, 1609–1631. doi:10.1037/a0011747
31. B.McMurray,, R.N.Aslin,, & J.C.Toscano, (2009). Statistical learning of phonetic categories: Insights from a computational approach. Developmental Science, 12, 369–378. doi:10.1111/j.1467-7687.2009.00822.x
32. B.McMurray,, M.A.Clayards,, M.K.Tanenhaus,, & R.N.Aslin, (2008). Tracking the time course of phonetic cue integration during spoken word recognition. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 15, 1064–1071. doi:10.3758/PBR.15.6.1064
33. B.McMurray,, & A.Jongman, (2011). What information is necessary for speech categorization? Harnessing variability in the speech signal by integrating cues computed relative to expectations. Psychological Review, 118, 219–46. doi:10.1037/a0022325
34. B.McMurray,, K.A.Kovack-Lesh,, D.Goodwin,, & W.McEchron, (2013). Infant directed speech and the development of speech perception: Enhancing development or an unintended consequence? Cognition, 129, 362–378. doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2013.07.015
35. B.McMurray,, M.K.Tanenhaus,, & R.N.Aslin, (2009). Within-category VOT affects recovery from “lexical” garden-paths: Evidence against phoneme-level inhibition. Journal of Memory and Language, 60(1), 65–91. doi:10.1016/j.jml.2008.07.002
36. J.L.Miller,, & E.R.Dexter, (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
37. J.L.Miller,, K.P.Green,, & A.Reeves, (1986). Speaking rate and segments: A look at the relation between speech production and speech perception for the voicing contrast. Phonetica, 43(1–3), 106–115. doi:10.1159/000261764
38. J.L.Miller,, & F.Grosjean, (1981). How the components of speaking rate influence perception of phonetic segments. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 7, 208–215. doi:10.1037/0096-1523.7.1.208
39. J.L.Miller,, F.Grosjean,, & C.Lomanto, (1984). Articulation rate and its variability in spontaneous speech: A reanalysis and some implications. Phonetica, 41, 215–225. doi:10.1159/000261728
40. J.L.Miller,, & A.M.Liberman, (1979). Some effects of later-occurring information on the perception of stop consonant and semivowel. Perception and Psychophysics, 25, 457–465. doi:10.3758/BF03213823
41. J.L.Miller,, T.Patterson,, & R.Ulrich, (1998). Jackknife-based method for measuring LRP onset latency differences. Psychophysiology, 35(1), 99–115. doi:10.1111/1469-8986.3510099
42. J.L.Miller,, & L.E.Volaitis, (1989). Effect of speaking rate on the perceptual structure of a phonetic category. Perception and Psychophysics, 46, 505–512. doi:10.3758/BF03208147
43. J.L.Miller,, & S.C.Wayland, (1993). Limits on the limitations of context-conditioned effects in the perception of [b] and [w]. Perception and Psychophysics, 54, 205–210. doi:10.3758/BF03211757
44. T.M.Nearey, (1986). Modeling the role of inherent spectral change in vowel identification. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 80, 1297–1308. doi:10.1121/1.394433
45. T.M.Nearey, (1990). The segment as a unit of speech perception. Journal of Phonetics, 18, 347–373.
46. T.M.Nearey, (1997). Speech perception as pattern recognition. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 101, 3241–3254. doi:10.1121/1.418290
47. T.M.Nearey,, & B.L.Rochet, (1994). Effects of place of articulation and vowel context on VOT production and perception for French and English stops. Journal of the International Phonetic Association, 24(1), 1–18. doi:10.1017/S0025100300004965
48. G.C.Oden,, & D.W.Massaro, (1978). Integration of featural information in speech perception. Psychological Review, 85, 172–191. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.85.3.172
49. H.Pashler, (1994). Dual-task interference in simple tasks: Data and theory. Psychological Bulletin, 116, 220–244. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.116.2.220
50. J.Pind, (1995). Speaking rate, voice-onset time, and quantity: The search for higher-order invariants for two Icelandic speech cues. Perception and Psychophysics, 57, 291–304. doi:10.3758/BF03213055
51. D.B.Pisoni, (1997). Some thoughts on “normalization” in speech perception. In K.Johnson & J.W.Mullenix (Eds.), Talker variability in speech processing (pp. 9–32). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
52. D.B.Pisoni,, T.D.Carrell,, & S.J.Gans, (1983). Perception of the duration of rapid spectrum changes in speech and nonspeech signals. Perception and Psychophysics, 34, 314–322. doi:10.3758/BF03203043
53. R.F.Port,, & J.Dalby, (1982). Consonant/vowel ratio as a cue for voicing in English. Perception and Psychophysics, 32(2), 141–152. doi:10.3758/BF03204273
54. E.Reinisch,, & M.J.Sjerps, (2013). The uptake of spectral and temporal cues in vowel perception is rapidly influenced by context. Journal of Phonetics, 41(2), 101–116. doi:10.1016/j.wocn.2013.01.002
55. B.H.Repp, (1981). On levels of description in speech research. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 69, 1462–1464. doi:10.1121/1.385779
56. B.H.Repp, (1982). Phonetic trading relations and context effects: New experimental evidence for a speech mode of perception. Psychological Bulletin, 92(1), 81–110. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.92.1.81
57. A.P.Salverda,, D.Dahan,, & J.M.McQueen, (2003). The role of prosodic boundaries in the resolution of lexical embedding in speech comprehension. Cognition, 90(1), 51–89. doi:10.1016/S0010-0277(03)00139-2
58. P.C.Shinn,, S.E.Blumstein,, & A.Jongman, (1985). Limitations of context conditioned effects in the perception of [b] and [w]. Perception and Psychophysics, 38, 397–407. doi:10.3758/BF03207170
59. R.Smits, (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
60. R.Smits, (2001b). Hierarchical categorization of coarticulated phonemes: A theoretical analysis. Perception and Psychophysics, 63, 1109–1139. doi:10.3758/BF03194529
61. Q.Summerfield, (1981). Articulatory rate and perceptual constancy in phonetic perception. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 7, 1074–1095. doi:10.1037/0096-1523.7.5.1074
62. A.K.Syrdal,, & H.S.Gopal, (1986). A perceptual model of vowel recognition based on the auditory representation of American English vowels. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 79, 1086–1100. doi:10.1121/1.393381
63. M.Tanenhaus,, M.Spivey-Knowlton,, K.Eberhard,, & J.C.Sedivy, (1995). Integration of visual and linguistic information in spoken language comprehension. Science, 268, 632–634. doi:10.1126/science.7777863
64. J.C.Toscano,, & B.McMurray, (2010). Cue integration with categories: Weighting acoustic cues in speech using unsupervised learning and distributional statistics. Cognitive Science, 34, 434–464. doi:10.1111/j.1551-6709.2009.01077.x
65. J.C.Toscano,, & B.McMurray, (2012). Cue-integration and context effects in speech: Evidence against speaking-rate normalization. Attention, Perception, and Psychophysics, 74, 1284–1301. doi:10.3758/s13414-012-0306-z
66. J.C.Toscano,, B.McMurray,, J.Dennhardt,, & S.J.Luck, (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. doi:10.1177/0956797610384142
67. A.Turk,, S.Nakai,, & M.Sugahara, (2006). Acoustic segment durations in prosodic research: A practical guide. In S.Sudhoff, D.Lenertová, R.Meyer, S.Pappert, P.Augurzky, I.Mleinek, N.Richter, & J.Schließer (Eds.), Methods in empirical prosody research (pp. 1–28). Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
68. J.A.Utman, (1998). Effects of local speaking rate context on the perception of voice-onset time in initial stop consonants. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 103, 1640–1653. doi:10.1121/1.421297
69. C.Van Petten,, S.Coulson,, S.Rubin,, E.Plante,, & M.Parks, (1999). Time course of word identification and semantic integration in spoken language. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 25, 394–417. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.25.2.394
70. P.Warren,, & W.Marslen-Wilson, (1987). Continuous uptake of acoustic cues in spoken word recognition. Perception & Psychophysics, 41, 262–275. doi:10.3758/BF03208224
71. S.C.Wayland,, J.L.Miller,, & L.E.Volaitis, (1994). The influence of sentential speaking rate on the internal structure of phonetic categories. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 95, 2694–2701. doi:10.1121/1.409838