Literature DB >> 12132766

Stimulus-based lexical distinctiveness as a general word-recognition mechanism.

Sven L Mattys1, Lynne E Bernstein, Edward T Auer.   

Abstract

Word recognition is generally assumed to be achieved via competition in the mental lexicon between phonetically similar word forms. However, this process has so far been examined only in the context of auditory phonetic similarity. In the present study, we investigated whether the influence of word-form similarity on word recognition holds in the visual modality and with the patterns of visual phonetic similarity. Deaf and hearing participants identified isolated spoken words presented visually on a video monitor. On the basis of computational modeling of the lexicon from visual confusion matrices of visual speech syllables, words were chosen to vary in visual phonetic distinctiveness, ranging from visually unambiguous (lexical equivalence class [LEC] size of 1) to highly confusable (LEC size greater than 10). Identification accuracy was found to be highly related to the word LEC size and frequency of occurrence in English. Deaf and hearing participants did not differ in their sensitivity to word LEC size and frequency. The results indicate that visual spoken word recognition shows strong similarities with its auditory counterpart in that the same dependencies on lexical similarity and word frequency are found to influence visual speech recognition accuracy. In particular, the results suggest that stimulus-based lexical distinctiveness is a valid construct to describe the underlying machinery of both visual and auditory spoken word recognition.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12132766     DOI: 10.3758/bf03194734

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Percept Psychophys        ISSN: 0031-5117


  24 in total

1.  The influence of the lexicon on speech read word recognition: contrasting segmental and lexical distinctiveness.

Authors:  Edward T Auer
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2002-06

2.  Hearing lips in a second language: visual articulatory information enables the perception of second language sounds.

Authors:  Jordi Navarra; Salvador Soto-Faraco
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2005-12-14

3.  Attention to touch weakens audiovisual speech integration.

Authors:  Agnès Alsius; Jordi Navarra; Salvador Soto-Faraco
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2007-11       Impact factor: 1.972

4.  Lipreading in school-age children: the roles of age, hearing status, and cognitive ability.

Authors:  Nancy Tye-Murray; Sandra Hale; Brent Spehar; Joel Myerson; Mitchell S Sommers
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2014-04-01       Impact factor: 2.297

5.  Sizing up the competition: quantifying the influence of the mental lexicon on auditory and visual spoken word recognition.

Authors:  Julia F Strand; Mitchell S Sommers
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2011-09       Impact factor: 1.840

6.  Response Errors in Females' and Males' Sentence Lipreading Necessitate Structurally Different Models for Predicting Lipreading Accuracy.

Authors:  Lynne E Bernstein
Journal:  Lang Learn       Date:  2018-02-26

Review 7.  Investigating speechreading and deafness.

Authors:  Edward T Auer
Journal:  J Am Acad Audiol       Date:  2010-03       Impact factor: 1.664

Review 8.  Prediction and constraint in audiovisual speech perception.

Authors:  Jonathan E Peelle; Mitchell S Sommers
Journal:  Cortex       Date:  2015-03-20       Impact factor: 4.027

9.  Spoken word recognition by eye.

Authors:  Edward T Auer
Journal:  Scand J Psychol       Date:  2009-10

10.  Lip-reading aids word recognition most in moderate noise: a Bayesian explanation using high-dimensional feature space.

Authors:  Wei Ji Ma; Xiang Zhou; Lars A Ross; John J Foxe; Lucas C Parra
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2009-03-04       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.