Literature DB >> 33754298

Perceptual learning of multiple talkers requires additional exposure.

Sahil Luthra1,2, Hannah Mechtenberg3, Emily B Myers3,4,5.   

Abstract

Because different talkers produce their speech sounds differently, listeners benefit from maintaining distinct generative models (sets of beliefs) about the correspondence between acoustic information and phonetic categories for different talkers. A robust literature on phonetic recalibration indicates that when listeners encounter a talker who produces their speech sounds idiosyncratically (e.g., a talker who produces their /s/ sound atypically), they can update their generative model for that talker. Such recalibration has been shown to occur in a relatively talker-specific way. Because listeners in ecological situations often meet several new talkers at once, the present study considered how the process of simultaneously updating two distinct generative models compares to updating one model at a time. Listeners were exposed to two talkers, one who produced /s/ atypically and one who produced /∫/ atypically. Critically, these talkers only produced these sounds in contexts where lexical information disambiguated the phoneme's identity (e.g., epi_ode, flouri_ing). When initial exposure to the two talkers was blocked by voice (Experiment 1), listeners recalibrated to these talkers after relatively little exposure to each talker (32 instances per talker, of which 16 contained ambiguous fricatives). However, when the talkers were intermixed during learning (Experiment 2), listeners required more exposure trials before they were able to adapt to the idiosyncratic productions of these talkers (64 instances per talker, of which 32 contained ambiguous fricatives). Results suggest that there is a perceptual cost to simultaneously updating multiple distinct generative models, potentially because listeners must first select which generative model to update.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Perceptual learning; Speech perception

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 33754298      PMCID: PMC8217155          DOI: 10.3758/s13414-021-02261-w

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys        ISSN: 1943-3921            Impact factor:   2.157


  24 in total

1.  The specificity of perceptual learning in speech processing.

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

2.  Perceptual adaptation to non-native speech.

Authors:  Ann R Bradlow; Tessa Bent
Journal:  Cognition       Date:  2007-05-29

3.  Perceptual learning in speech.

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

4.  Does perceptual learning in speech reflect changes in phonetic category representation or decision bias?

Authors:  Constance M Clarke-Davidson; Paul A Luce; James R Sawusch
Journal:  Percept Psychophys       Date:  2008-05

5.  The weckud wetch of the wast: lexical adaptation to a novel accent.

Authors:  Jessica Maye; Richard N Aslin; Michael K Tanenhaus
Journal:  Cogn Sci       Date:  2008-04-05

6.  Words and voices: episodic traces in spoken word identification and recognition memory.

Authors:  S D Goldinger
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  1996-09       Impact factor: 3.051

7.  Attention modulates specificity effects in spoken word recognition: Challenges to the time-course hypothesis.

Authors:  Rachel M Theodore; Sheila E Blumstein; Sahil Luthra
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2015-07       Impact factor: 2.199

8.  Perceptual learning for speech: Is there a return to normal?

Authors:  Tanya Kraljic; Arthur G Samuel
Journal:  Cogn Psychol       Date:  2005-09       Impact factor: 3.468

9.  Desirable and undesirable difficulties: Influences of variability, training schedule, and aptitude on nonnative phonetic learning.

Authors:  Pamela Fuhrmeister; Emily B Myers
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2020-05       Impact factor: 2.199

10.  Dual-learning systems during speech category learning.

Authors:  Bharath Chandrasekaran; Han-Gyol Yi; W Todd Maddox
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2014-04
View more
  3 in total

1.  Rapid but specific perceptual learning partially explains individual differences in the recognition of challenging speech.

Authors:  Karen Banai; Hanin Karawani; Limor Lavie; Yizhar Lavner
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2022-06-15       Impact factor: 4.996

2.  Semantic context and stimulus variability independently affect rapid adaptation to non-native English speech in young adults.

Authors:  Rebecca E Bieber; Sandra Gordon-Salant
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2022-01       Impact factor: 1.840

3.  Listener expectations and the perceptual accommodation of talker variability: A pre-registered replication.

Authors:  Sahil Luthra; David Saltzman; Emily B Myers; James S Magnuson
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2021-05-04       Impact factor: 2.199

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.