Literature DB >> 35067570

Lexical Access Changes Based on Listener Needs: Real-Time Word Recognition in Continuous Speech in Cochlear Implant Users.

Francis X Smith1, Bob McMurray1,2.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: A key challenge in word recognition is the temporary ambiguity created by the fact that speech unfolds over time. In normal hearing (NH) listeners, this temporary ambiguity is resolved through incremental processing and competition among lexical candidates. Post-lingually deafened cochlear implant (CI) users show similar incremental processing and competition but with slight delays. However, even brief delays could lead to drastic changes when compounded across multiple words in a phrase. This study asks whether words presented in non-informative continuous speech (a carrier phrase) are processed differently than in isolation and whether NH listeners and CI users exhibit different effects of a carrier phrase.
DESIGN: In a Visual World Paradigm experiment, listeners heard words either in isolation or in non-informative carrier phrases (e.g., "click on the…" ). Listeners selected the picture corresponding to the target word from among four items including the target word (e.g., mustard ), a cohort competitor (e.g., mustache ), a rhyme competitor (e.g., custard ), and an unrelated item (e.g., penguin ). Eye movements were tracked as an index of the relative activation of each lexical candidate as competition unfolds over the course of word recognition. Participants included 21 post-lingually deafened cochlear implant users and 21 NH controls. A replication experiment presented in the Supplemental Digital Content, http://links.lww.com/EANDH/A999 included an additional 22 post-lingually deafened CI users and 18 NH controls.
RESULTS: Both CI users and the NH controls were accurate at recognizing the words both in continuous speech and in isolation. The time course of lexical activation (indexed by the fixations) differed substantially between groups. CI users were delayed in fixating the target relative to NH controls. Additionally, CI users showed less competition from cohorts than NH controls (even as previous studies have often report increased competition). However, CI users took longer to suppress the cohort and suppressed it less fully than the NH controls. For both CI users and NH controls, embedding words in carrier phrases led to more immediacy in lexical access as observed by increases in cohort competition relative to when words were presented in isolation. However, CI users were not differentially affected by the carriers.
CONCLUSIONS: Unlike prior work, CI users appeared to exhibit "wait-and-see" profile, in which lexical access is delayed minimizing early competition. However, CI users simultaneously sustained competitor activation late in the trial, possibly to preserve flexibility. This hybrid profile has not been observed previously. When target words are heard in continuous speech, both CI users and NH controls more heavily weight early information. However, CI users (but not NH listeners) also commit less fully to the target, potentially keeping options open if they need to recover from a misperception. This mix of patterns reflects a lexical system that is extremely flexible and adapts to fit the needs of a listener.
Copyright © 2022 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2022        PMID: 35067570      PMCID: PMC9300769          DOI: 10.1097/AUD.0000000000001203

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ear Hear        ISSN: 0196-0202            Impact factor:   3.562


  44 in total

1.  Using the jackknife-based scoring method for measuring LRP onset effects in factorial designs.

Authors:  R Ulrich; J Miller
Journal:  Psychophysiology       Date:  2001-09       Impact factor: 4.016

Review 2.  A capacity theory of comprehension: individual differences in working memory.

Authors:  M A Just; P A Carpenter
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  1992-01       Impact factor: 8.934

3.  Models of spoken-word recognition.

Authors:  Andrea Weber; Odette Scharenborg
Journal:  Wiley Interdiscip Rev Cogn Sci       Date:  2012-04-02

4.  Relationship between perception of spectral ripple and speech recognition in cochlear implant and vocoder listeners.

Authors:  Leonid M Litvak; Anthony J Spahr; Aniket A Saoji; Gene Y Fridman
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2007-08       Impact factor: 1.840

5.  Re-reconsidering the role of temporal order in spoken word recognition.

Authors:  Julie Gregg; Albrecht W Inhoff; Cynthia M Connine
Journal:  Q J Exp Psychol (Hove)       Date:  2019-06-04       Impact factor: 2.143

6.  The TRACE model of speech perception.

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

Review 7.  Perception of the speech code.

Authors:  A M Liberman; F S Cooper; D P Shankweiler; M Studdert-Kennedy
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  1967-11       Impact factor: 8.934

8.  Coarticulation of lip rounding.

Authors:  R Daniloff; K Moll
Journal:  J Speech Hear Res       Date:  1968-12

9.  What information is necessary for speech categorization? Harnessing variability in the speech signal by integrating cues computed relative to expectations.

Authors:  Bob McMurray; Allard Jongman
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  2011-04       Impact factor: 8.934

10.  Validation of the Iowa Test of Consonant Perception.

Authors:  Jason Geller; Ann Holmes; Adam Schwalje; Joel I Berger; Phillip E Gander; Inyong Choi; Bob McMurray
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2021-09       Impact factor: 2.482

View more
  1 in total

1.  Multimodal bilinguals reveal complex pathways for flexible language processing.

Authors:  Bob McMurray; John B Muegge; Keith Apfelbaum
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2022-09-30       Impact factor: 12.779

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.