Rate dependent speech processing can be speech specific: Evidence from the perceptual disappearance of words under changes in context speech rate

Attention, Perception, and Psychophysics

Volumn 78, Issue 1, 2016, Pages 334-345

  Pitt, Mark A ^a   Szostak, Christine ^a   Dilley, Laura C ^b  

^a OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Domain generality; Phonetic perception; Speech rate; Spoken word recognition

Indexed keywords

ADULT; FEMALE; HUMAN; LANGUAGE; MALE; SPEECH; SPEECH PERCEPTION; TIME FACTOR;

ADULT; FEMALE; HUMANS; LANGUAGE; MALE; SPEECH ACOUSTICS; SPEECH PERCEPTION; TIME FACTORS;

EID: 84953639704     PISSN: 19433921     EISSN: 1943393X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3758/s13414-015-0981-7     Document Type: Article

References (50)

1. Arnal, L. H., Doelling, K. B., & Poeppel, D. (2014). Delta–beta coupled oscillations underlie temporal prediction accuracy. Cerebral Cortex. doi:10.1093/cercor/bhu103
2. Baer, T., & Moore, B. C. J. (1993). Effects of spectral smearing on the intelligibility of sentences in noise. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 94(3), 1229–1241.
3. Baese-Berk, M. M., Heffner, C. C., Dilley, L. C., Pitt, M. A., Morrill, T. H., & McAuley, J. D. (2014). Long-term temporal tracking of speech rate affects spoken-word recognition. Psychological Science, 25(8), 1546–1553. doi:10.1177/0956797614533705
4. Barbosa, P. (2007). From syntax to acoustic duration: A dynamical model of speech rhythm production. Speech Communication, 49, 725–742.
5. Bates, D., Maechler, M., & Bolker, B. (2012). lme4: Linear mixed-effects models using S4 classes (R package version 0.999375-42). https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/lme4/index.html
6. Best, C. T., Morrongiello, B., & Robson, R. (1981). Perceptual equivalence of acoustic cues in speech and nonspeech perception. Perception & Psychophysics, 29(3), 191–211. doi:10.3758/bf03207286
7. Byrd, D., & Saltzman, E. (2003). The elastic phrase: Modeling the dynamics of boundary-adjacent lengthening. Journal of Phonetics, 31, 149–180.
8. Cummins, F., & Port, R. F. (1998). Rhythmic constraints on stress timing in English. Journal of Phonetics, 26, 145–171.
9. d’Alessandro, C., & Mertens, P. (1995). Automatic pitch contour stylization using a model of tonal perception. Computer Speech and Language, 9(3), 257–288.
10. 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(2), 222. doi:10.1037/e537052012-126
11. Dilley, L. C., & Pitt, M. (2010). Altering context speech rate can cause words to appear or disappear. Psychological Science, 21(11), 1664–1670. doi:10.1177/0956797610384743
12. Dilley, L. C., Morrill, T., & Banzina, E. (2013). New tests of the distal speech rate effect: Examining cross-linguistic generalizability. Frontiers in Language Sciences, 4(1002), 1–13. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2013.01002
13. Doelling, K., Arnal, L., Ghitza, O., & Poeppel, D. (2014). Acoustic landmarks drive delta–theta oscillations to enable speech comprehension by facilitating perceptual parsing. NeuroImage, 85, 761–768. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2013.06.035
14. Drullman, R., Festen, J. M., & Plomp, R. (1994a). Effect of reducing slow temporal modulations on speech reception. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 95(5), 2670. doi:10.1121/1.409836
15. Drullman, R., Festen, J. M., & Plomp, R. (1994b). Effect of temporal envelope smearing on speech reception. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 95, 1053–1064.
16. Elliott, T., & Theunissen, F. (2009). The modulation transfer function fro speech intelligibility. PLOS Computational Biology, 5(3), e1000302. doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1000302
17. Ghitza, O. (2012). On the role of theta-driven syllabic parsing in decoding speech: Intelligibility of speech with a manipulated modulation spectrum. Frontiers in Psychology, 3. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00238
18. Giraud, A. L., & Poeppel, D. (2012). Cortical oscillations and speech processing: Emerging computational principles and operations. Nature Neuroscience, 15(4), 511–517. doi:10.1038/nn.3063
19. Gordon, P. A. (1988). Induction of rate-dependent processing by coarse-grained aspects of speech. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 43, 137–146.
20. Gross, J., Hoogenboom, N., Thut, G., Schyns, P., Panzeri, S., Belin, P., & Garrod, S. (2013). Speech rhythms and multiplexed oscillatory sensory coding in the human brain. PLoS Biology, 11(12), e1001752–e1001752. doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.1001752
21. Guenther, F. H., Espy-Wilson, C., Boyce, S., Matthies, M., Zandipour, M., & Perkell, J. S. (1999). Articulatory tradeoffs reduce acoustic variability during American English /r/ production. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 105(5), 2854–2865.
22. Halle, M., & Stevens, K. N. (1962). Speech recognition: A model and a program for research. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, 8(2), 155–159. doi:10.1109/tit.1962.1057686
23. Heffner, C., Dilley, L. C., McAuley, J. D., & Pitt, M. (2013). When cues combine: How distal and proximal acoustic cues are integrated in word segmentation. Language and Cognitive Processes, 28(9), 1275–1302. doi:10.1080/01690965.2012.672229
24. Henry, M. J., & Obleser, J. (2012). Frequency modulation entrains slow neural oscillations and optimizes human listening behavior. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 109(49), 20095–20100. doi:10.1073/pnas.1213390109
25. Henry, M. J., & Obleser, J. (2013). Dissociable neural response signatures for slow amplitude and frequency modulation in human auditory cortex. PLOS ONE, 8(10), e78758. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0078758
26. Hickok, G. (2012). Computational neuroanatomy of speech production. Nature Reviews Neuroscience. doi:10.1038/nrn3158
27. Hillenbrand, J., Getty, L. A., Clark, M. J., & Wheeler, K. (1995). Acoustic characteristics of American English vowels. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 97(5), 3099–3111.
28. Kerlin, J., Shahin, A., & Miller, L. (2009). Gain control of cortical speech representations by selective attention in a “cocktail party.”. NeuroImage, 47, S42. doi:10.1016/s1053-8119(09)70005-9
29. Large, E. W., & Jones, M. R. (1999). The dynamics of attending: How people track time-varying events. Psychological Review, 106(1), 119–159. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.106.1.119
30. Luo, H., & Poeppel, D. (2007). Phase patterns of neuronal responses reliably discriminate speech in human auditory cortex. Neuron, 54, 1001–1010.
31. McAuley, J. D., & Jones, M. R. (2003). Modeling effects of rhythmic context on perceived duration: A comparison of interval and entrainment approaches to short-interval timing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 29(6), 1102–1125. doi:10.1037/0096-1523.29.6.1102
32. Mehler, J., Jusczyk, P. W., Lambertz, G., Halsted, N., Bertoncini, J., & Amier-Tison, C. (1988). A precursor of language acquisition in young infants. Cognition, 29, 143–178.
33. Mertens, Piet (2004). The Prosogram: Semi-Automatic Transcription of Prosody based on a Tonal Perception Model. In B. Bel & I. Marlien (eds.) Proceedings of Speech Prosody 2004, Nara, Japan. p 23–26.
34. Miller, J.L. (1981). Phonetic perception: Evidence for context-dependent and context-independent processing. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 69(3), 822–831. doi:10.1121/1.385593
35. Morrill, T., Dilley, L., McAuley, J. D., & Pitt, M. (2014). Distal rhythm influences whether or not listeners hear a word in continuous speech: Support for a perceptual grouping hypothesis. Cognition, 131(1), 69–74. doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2013.12.006
36. Nam, H., Goldstein, L., & Saltzman, E. (2006). Dynamical modeling of supragestural timing. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 10th Laboratory Phonology Conference, Paris, France.
37. Peelle, J. E., & Wingfield, A. (2005). Dissociations in perceptual learning revealed by adult age differences in adaptation to time-compressed speech. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 31(6), 1315–1330. doi:10.1037/0096-1523.31.6.1315
38. Peelle, J. E., Gross, J., & Davis, M. H. (2013). Phase-locked responses to speech in human auditory cortex are enhanced during comprehension. Cerebral Cortex, 23(6), 1378–1387. doi:10.1093/cercor/bhs118
39. Port, R. F. (1979). The influence of tempo on stop closure duration as a cue for voicing and place. Journal of Phonetics, 7, 45–56.
40. Port, R. F. (2003). Meter and speech. Journal of Phonetics, 31, 599–611.
41. Reinisch, E., Jesse, A., & McQueen, J. M. (2011a). Speaking rate affects the perception of duration as a suprasegmental lexical-stress cue. Language and Speech, 54(2), 147–165. doi:10.1177/0023830910397489
42. Reinisch, E., Jesse, A., & McQueen, J. M. (2011b). Speaking rate from proximal and distal contexts is used during word segmentation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 37(3), 978–996. doi:10.1037/a0021923
43. Remez, R. E., Rubin, P. E., Pisoni, D. B., & Carrell, T. D. (1981). Speech perception without traditional speech cues. Science, 212, 947–949. doi:10.1126/science.7233191
44. Saltzman, E., Nam, H., Krivokapic, J., & Goldstein, L. (2008). A task-dynamic toolkit for modeling the effects of prosodic structure on articulation. Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Speech Prosody Campinas, Brazil, 175–184.
45. Shannon, R. V., Zeng, F. G., Kamath, V., Wygonski, J., & Ekelid, M. (1995). Speech recognition with primarily temporal cues. Science, 270, 303–304. doi:10.1126/science.270.5234.303
46. Sjerps, M. J., Mitterer, H., & McQueen, J. M. (2011). Listening to different speakers: On the time-course of perceptual compensation for vocal-tract characteristics. Neuropsychologia, 49, 3831–3846. doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2011.09.044
47. Summerfield, Q. (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
48. Turk, A. E., & Sawusch, J. R. (1997). The domain of accentual lengthening in. American English Journal of Phonetics, 25(1), 25–41. doi:10.1006/jpho.1996.0032
49. Turk, A. E., & Shattuck-Hufnagel, S. (2000). Word-boundary-related duration patterns in English. Journal of Phonetics, 28, 397–440.
50. Wade, T., & Holt, L. L. (2005). Perceptual effects of preceding nonspeech rate on temporal properties of speech categories. Perception & Psychophysics, 67(6), 939–950. doi:10.3758/BF03193621