Literature DB >> 17874585

Modeling the word recognition data of Vitevitch and Luce (1998): is it ARTful?

Mark A Pitt1, Jay I Myung, Nicholas Altieri.   

Abstract

Vitevitch and Luce (1998) showed that the probability with which phonemes co-occur in the language (phonotactic probability) affects the speed with which words and nonwords are named. Words with high phonotactic probabilities between phonemes were named more slowly than words with low probabilities, whereas with nonwords, just the opposite was found. To reproduce this reversal in performance, a model would seem to require not merely sublexical representations, but sublexical representations that are relatively independent of lexical representations. ARTphone (Grossberg, Boardman, & Cohen, 1997) is designed to meet these requirements. In this study, we used a technique called parameter space partitioning to analyze ARTphone's behavior and to learn if it can mimic human behavior and, if so, to understand how. To perform best, differences in sublexical node probabilities must be amplified relative to lexical node probabilities to offset the additional source of inhibition (from top-down masking) that is found at the sublexical level.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17874585      PMCID: PMC2603571          DOI: 10.3758/bf03194086

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev        ISSN: 1069-9384


  11 in total

1.  Merging information in speech recognition: feedback is never necessary.

Authors:  D Norris; J M McQueen; A Cutler
Journal:  Behav Brain Sci       Date:  2000-06       Impact factor: 12.579

2.  Phonetic priming, neighborhood activation, and PARSYN.

Authors:  P A Luce; S D Goldinger; E T Auer; M S Vitevitch
Journal:  Percept Psychophys       Date:  2000-04

3.  Representation and competition in the perception of spoken words.

Authors:  M Gareth Gaskell; William D Marslen-Wilson
Journal:  Cogn Psychol       Date:  2002-09       Impact factor: 3.468

4.  The specificity of perceptual learning in speech processing.

Authors:  Frank Eisner; James M McQueen
Journal:  Percept Psychophys       Date:  2005-02

5.  A web-based interface to calculate phonotactic probability for words and nonwords in English.

Authors:  Michael S Vitevitch; Paul A Luce
Journal:  Behav Res Methods Instrum Comput       Date:  2004-08

6.  Global model analysis by parameter space partitioning.

Authors:  Mark A Pitt; Woojae Kim; Daniel J Navarro; Jay I Myung
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  2006-01       Impact factor: 8.934

7.  Perceptual learning in speech.

Authors:  Dennis Norris; James M McQueen; Anne Cutler
Journal:  Cogn Psychol       Date:  2003-09       Impact factor: 3.468

8.  Neural dynamics of variable-rate speech categorization.

Authors:  S Grossberg; I Boardman; M Cohen
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  1997-04       Impact factor: 3.332

9.  The TRACE model of speech perception.

Authors:  J L McClelland; J L Elman
Journal:  Cogn Psychol       Date:  1986-01       Impact factor: 3.468

10.  Recognizing spoken words: the neighborhood activation model.

Authors:  P A Luce; D B Pisoni
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  1998-02       Impact factor: 3.570

View more
  3 in total

Review 1.  Some behavioral and neurobiological constraints on theories of audiovisual speech integration: a review and suggestions for new directions.

Authors:  Nicholas Altieri; David B Pisoni; James T Townsend
Journal:  Seeing Perceiving       Date:  2011-09-29

2.  Evaluation and comparison of computational models.

Authors:  Jay I Myung; Yun Tang; Mark A Pitt
Journal:  Methods Enzymol       Date:  2009       Impact factor: 1.600

3.  Novel stress phonotactics are learnable by English speakers: Novel tone phonotactics are not.

Authors:  Yuan Bian; Gary S Dell
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2020-02
  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.