Literature DB >> 35474415

Revisiting the target-masker linguistic similarity hypothesis.

Violet A Brown1, Naseem H Dillman-Hasso2, ZhaoBin Li2, Lucia Ray2, Ellen Mamantov2, Kristin J Van Engen3, Julia F Strand2.   

Abstract

The linguistic similarity hypothesis states that it is more difficult to segregate target and masker speech when they are linguistically similar. For example, recognition of English target speech should be more impaired by the presence of Dutch masking speech than Mandarin masking speech because Dutch and English are more linguistically similar than Mandarin and English. Across four experiments, English target speech was consistently recognized more poorly when presented in English masking speech than in silence, speech-shaped noise, or an unintelligible masker (i.e., Dutch or Mandarin). However, we found no evidence for graded masking effects-Dutch did not impair performance more than Mandarin in any experiment, despite 650 participants being tested. This general pattern was consistent when using both a cross-modal paradigm (in which target speech was lipread and maskers were presented aurally; Experiments 1a and 1b) and an auditory-only paradigm (in which both the targets and maskers were presented aurally; Experiments 2a and 2b). These findings suggest that the linguistic similarity hypothesis should be refined to reflect the existing evidence: There is greater release from masking when the masker language differs from the target speech than when it is the same as the target speech. However, evidence that unintelligible maskers impair speech identification to a greater extent when they are more linguistically similar to the target language remains elusive.
© 2022. The Psychonomic Society, Inc.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Cross-modal masking; Linguistic similarity hypothesis; Masking; Speech identification

Mesh:

Year:  2022        PMID: 35474415     DOI: 10.3758/s13414-022-02486-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys        ISSN: 1943-3921            Impact factor:   2.199


  41 in total

1.  Informational and energetic masking effects in the perception of multiple simultaneous talkers.

Authors:  D S Brungart; B D Simpson; M A Ericson; K R Scott
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2001-11       Impact factor: 1.840

2.  Informational masking in young and elderly listeners for speech masked by simultaneous speech and noise.

Authors:  Trevor R Agus; Michael A Akeroyd; Stuart Gatehouse; David Warden
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2009-10       Impact factor: 1.840

3.  Contextual variability during speech-in-speech recognition.

Authors:  Susanne Brouwer; Ann R Bradlow
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2014-07       Impact factor: 1.840

4.  Autoscore: An open-source automated tool for scoring listener perception of speech.

Authors:  Stephanie A Borrie; Tyson S Barrett; Sarah E Yoho
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2019-01       Impact factor: 1.840

5.  Primary auditory stream segregation and perception of order in rapid sequences of tones.

Authors:  A S Bregman; J Campbell
Journal:  J Exp Psychol       Date:  1971-08

6.  Masking release effects of a standard and a regional linguistic variety.

Authors:  Susanne Brouwer
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2017-08       Impact factor: 1.840

7.  A Perceptual Phonetic Similarity Space for Languages: Evidence from Five Native Language Listener Groups.

Authors:  Ann Bradlow; Cynthia Clopper; Rajka Smiljanic; Mary Ann Walter
Journal:  Speech Commun       Date:  2010       Impact factor: 2.017

8.  The BKB (Bamford-Kowal-Bench) sentence lists for partially-hearing children.

Authors:  J Bench; A Kowal; J Bamford
Journal:  Br J Audiol       Date:  1979-08

9.  Linguistic contributions to speech-on-speech masking for native and non-native listeners: language familiarity and semantic content.

Authors:  Susanne Brouwer; Kristin J Van Engen; Lauren Calandruccio; Ann R Bradlow
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2012-02       Impact factor: 2.482

10.  Gorilla in our midst: An online behavioral experiment builder.

Authors:  Alexander L Anwyl-Irvine; Jessica Massonnié; Adam Flitton; Natasha Kirkham; Jo K Evershed
Journal:  Behav Res Methods       Date:  2020-02
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.