Literature DB >> 35032922

The effect of gap duration on the perception of fluent versus disfluent speech.

Haley J Warner1, D H Whalen2, Daphna Harel3, Eric S Jackson4.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Gap duration contributes to the perception of utterances as fluent or disfluent, but few studies have systematically investigated the impact of gap duration on fluency judgments. The purposes of this study were to determine how gaps impact disfluency perception, and how listener background and experience impact these judgments.
METHODS: Sixty participants (20 adults who stutter [AWS], 20 speech-language pathologists [SLPs], and 20 naïve listeners) listened to four tokens of the utterance, "Buy Bobby a puppy," produced at typical speech rates. The gap duration between "Buy" and "Bobby" was systematically manipulated with gaps ranging from 23.59 ms to 325.44 ms. Participants identified stimuli as fluent or disfluent.
RESULTS: The disfluency threshold - the point at which 50 % of trials were categorized as disfluent - occurred at a gap duration of 126.46 ms, across all participants and tokens. The SLPs exhibited higher disfluency thresholds than the AWS and the naïve listeners.
CONCLUSION: This study determined, based on the specific set of stimuli used, when the perception of utterances tends to shift from fluent to disfluent. Group differences indicated that SLPs are less inclined to identify disfluencies in speech potentially because they aim to be less critical of speech that deviates from "typical".
Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Disfluency; Fluency; Gap duration; Stuttering

Mesh:

Year:  2022        PMID: 35032922      PMCID: PMC8925352          DOI: 10.1016/j.jfludis.2022.105896

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Fluency Disord        ISSN: 0094-730X            Impact factor:   2.297


  30 in total

1.  IDENTIFICATION OF STUTTERERS FROM RECORDED SAMPLES OF THEIR "FLUENT" SPEECH.

Authors:  M A YOUNG
Journal:  J Speech Hear Res       Date:  1964-09

Review 2.  The selection of "fluent" samples in research on stuttering: conceptual and methodological considerations.

Authors:  P Finn; R J Ingham
Journal:  J Speech Hear Res       Date:  1989-06

3.  Multilevel Models for Communication Sciences and Disorders.

Authors:  Daphna Harel; Tara McAllister
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2019-04-15       Impact factor: 2.297

4.  Perceptual and acoustic evidence for reduced fluency in the vicinity of stuttering episodes.

Authors:  P Howell; T Wingfield
Journal:  Lang Speech       Date:  1990 Jan-Mar       Impact factor: 1.500

5.  Perception of silent pauses in continuous speech.

Authors:  D Duez
Journal:  Lang Speech       Date:  1985 Oct-Dec       Impact factor: 1.500

6.  A further analysis of fluency within stuttered speech.

Authors:  L R Few; J B Lingwall
Journal:  J Speech Hear Res       Date:  1972-06

7.  Intensity perception. I. Preliminary theory of intensity resolution.

Authors:  N I Durlach; L D Braida
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1969-08       Impact factor: 1.840

8.  Category judgment: a range-frequency model.

Authors:  A Parducci
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  1965-11       Impact factor: 8.934

9.  Judgments of stuttered and nonstuttered intervals by recognized authorities in stuttering research.

Authors:  A K Cordes; R J Ingham
Journal:  J Speech Hear Res       Date:  1995-02

10.  The Impact of Social-Cognitive Stress on Speech Variability, Determinism, and Stability in Adults Who Do and Do Not Stutter.

Authors:  Eric S Jackson; Mark Tiede; Deryk Beal; D H Whalen
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2016-12-01       Impact factor: 2.297

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.