Literature DB >> 22419403

Audience design affects acoustic reduction via production facilitation.

Jennifer E Arnold1, Jason M Kahn, Giulia C Pancani.   

Abstract

In this article, we examine the hypothesis that acoustic variation (e.g., reduced vs. prominent forms) results from audience design. Bard et al. (Journal of Memory and Language 42:1-22, 2000) have argued that acoustic prominence is unaffected by the speaker's estimate of addressee knowledge, using paradigms that contrast speaker and addressee knowledge. This question was tested in a novel paradigm, focusing on the effects of addressees' feedback about their understanding of the speaker's intended message. Speakers gave instructions to addressees about where to place objects (e.g., the teapot goes on red). The addressee either anticipated the object, by picking it up before the instruction, or waited for the instruction. For anticipating addressees, speakers began speaking more quickly and pronounced the word the with shorter duration, demonstrating effects of audience design. However, no effects appeared on the head noun (e.g., teapot), as measured by duration, amplitude, and perceived intelligibility. These results are consistent with a mechanism in which evidence about addressee understanding facilitates production processes, as opposed to triggering particular acoustic forms.

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22419403     DOI: 10.3758/s13423-012-0233-y

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


  10 in total

1.  Effect of ambiguity and lexical availability on syntactic and lexical production.

Authors:  V S Ferreira; G S Dell
Journal:  Cogn Psychol       Date:  2000-06       Impact factor: 3.468

2.  The smooth signal redundancy hypothesis: a functional explanation for relationships between redundancy, prosodic prominence, and duration in spontaneous speech.

Authors:  Matthew Aylett; Alice Turk
Journal:  Lang Speech       Date:  2004       Impact factor: 1.500

3.  Tic Tac Toe: effects of predictability and importance on acoustic prominence in language production.

Authors:  Duane G Watson; Jennifer E Arnold; Michael K Tanenhaus
Journal:  Cognition       Date:  2007-08-13

4.  When do speakers take into account common ground?

Authors:  W S Horton; B Keysar
Journal:  Cognition       Date:  1996-04

5.  Repeating words in spontaneous speech.

Authors:  H H Clark; T Wasow
Journal:  Cogn Psychol       Date:  1998-12       Impact factor: 3.468

6.  Conceptual pacts and lexical choice in conversation.

Authors:  S E Brennan; H H Clark
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  1996-11       Impact factor: 3.051

7.  Limited visual control of the intelligibility of speech in face-to-face dialogue.

Authors:  A H Anderson; E G Bard; C Sotillo; A Newlands; G Doherty-Sneddon
Journal:  Percept Psychophys       Date:  1997-05

8.  Repetition is easy: why repeated referents have reduced prominence.

Authors:  Tuan Q Lam; Duane G Watson
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2010-12

9.  Experimental and theoretical advances in prosody: A review.

Authors:  Michael Wagner; Duane G Watson
Journal:  Lang Cogn Process       Date:  2010-01-01

10.  Speaking and Hearing Clearly: Talker and Listener Factors in Speaking Style Changes.

Authors:  Rajka Smiljanić; Ann R Bradlow
Journal:  Lang Linguist Compass       Date:  2009-01-01
  10 in total
  11 in total

1.  Synthesizing meaning and processing approaches to prosody: performance matters.

Authors:  Jennifer E Arnold; Duane G Watson
Journal:  Lang Cogn Neurosci       Date:  2015       Impact factor: 2.331

2.  Phonological Neighborhood Competition Affects Spoken Word Production Irrespective of Sentential Context.

Authors:  Neal P Fox; Megan Reilly; Sheila E Blumstein
Journal:  J Mem Lang       Date:  2015-08-01       Impact factor: 3.059

3.  Repetition reduction during word and concept overlap in bilinguals.

Authors:  Tuan Q Lam; Viorica Marian
Journal:  J Mem Lang       Date:  2015-10-01       Impact factor: 3.059

4.  Masking auditory feedback does not eliminate repetition reduction.

Authors:  Cassandra L Jacobs; Torrey M Loucks; Duane G Watson; Gary S Dell
Journal:  Lang Cogn Neurosci       Date:  2019-11-21       Impact factor: 2.842

5.  The role of linguistic experience in the processing of probabilistic information in production.

Authors:  Erin Gustafson; Matthew Goldrick
Journal:  Lang Cogn Neurosci       Date:  2017-09-11       Impact factor: 2.331

6.  Interference between conversation and a concurrent visuomotor task.

Authors:  Timothy W Boiteau; Patrick S Malone; Sara A Peters; Amit Almor
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Gen       Date:  2013-02-18

7.  Reduction in Prosodic Prominence Predicts Speakers' Recall: Implications for Theories of Prosody.

Authors:  Scott H Fraundorf; Duane G Watson; Aaron S Benjamin
Journal:  Lang Cogn Neurosci       Date:  2014-09-24       Impact factor: 2.331

8.  The (in)dependence of articulation and lexical planning during isolated word production.

Authors:  Esteban Buz; T Florian Jaeger
Journal:  Lang Cogn Neurosci       Date:  2015-11-23       Impact factor: 2.331

9.  Dynamically adapted context-specific hyper-articulation: Feedback from interlocutors affects speakers' subsequent pronunciations.

Authors:  Esteban Buz; Michael K Tanenhaus; T Florian Jaeger
Journal:  J Mem Lang       Date:  2016-02-02       Impact factor: 3.059

10.  Lexical Diversity, Lexical Sophistication, and Predictability for Speech in Multiple Listening Conditions.

Authors:  Melissa M Baese-Berk; Shiloh Drake; Kurtis Foster; Dae-Yong Lee; Cecelia Staggs; Jonathan M Wright
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2021-06-18
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.