Literature DB >> 35641859

Phonotactic and lexical factors in talker discrimination and identification.

Sandy Abu El Adas1, Susannah V Levi2.   

Abstract

Previous research has shown that listeners are better at processing talker information in their native language compared to an unfamiliar language, a phenomenon known as the language familiarity effect. Several studies have explored two mechanisms that support this effect: lexical status and phonological familiarity. Further support for the importance of phonological knowledge comes from studies showing that participants with poorer reading skills perform worse on talker processing tasks. Previous research also suggested that speech perception in individuals with poor reading skills may be task dependent, with poorer performance on identification tasks compared to discrimination tasks. In the current study, we explore talker perception while manipulating lexicality (words, nonwords) and phonotactic probability (high, low) in participants who differ in reading ability and phonological working memory using a talker discrimination task (Experiment 1) and a talker identification task (Experiment 2). Results from these experiments revealed an effect of lexical status and phonotactic probability in both the discrimination and the identification tasks. Effects of phonological working memory were found only for the identification task, where participants with higher scores identified more talkers correctly. These results suggest that listeners use both phonological and lexical information when processing talker information. The task-modulated results show that listeners with poorer phonological working memory perform worse on talker identification tasks that tap into long-term memory representations, but not on discrimination tasks that can be completed with more peripheral processing. This may suggest a more general link between phonological working memory and learning talker categories.
© 2022. The Psychonomic Society, Inc.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Phonological processing; Reading ability; Speech perception; Talker processing

Mesh:

Year:  2022        PMID: 35641859     DOI: 10.3758/s13414-022-02485-4

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


  18 in total

1.  Allophonic mode of speech perception in dyslexia.

Authors:  Willy Serniclaes; Sandra Van Heghe; Philippe Mousty; René Carré; Liliane Sprenger-Charolles
Journal:  J Exp Child Psychol       Date:  2004-04

2.  Are speech perception deficits associated with developmental dyslexia?

Authors:  F R Manis; C Mcbride-Chang; M S Seidenberg; P Keating; L M Doi; B Munson; A Petersen
Journal:  J Exp Child Psychol       Date:  1997-08

3.  Speech perception deficits in poor readers: auditory processing or phonological coding?

Authors:  M Mody; M Studdert-Kennedy; S Brady
Journal:  J Exp Child Psychol       Date:  1997-02

Review 4.  Methodological considerations for interpreting the Language Familiarity Effect in talker processing.

Authors:  Susannah V Levi
Journal:  Wiley Interdiscip Rev Cogn Sci       Date:  2018-10-17

5.  Words Get in the Way: Linguistic Effects on Talker Discrimination.

Authors:  Chandan R Narayan; Lorinda Mak; Ellen Bialystok
Journal:  Cogn Sci       Date:  2016-07-22

6.  Nonparametric indexes for sensitivity and bias: computing formulas.

Authors:  J B Grier
Journal:  Psychol Bull       Date:  1971-06       Impact factor: 17.737

7.  Re-Examining the Effect of Top-Down Linguistic Information on Speaker-Voice Discrimination.

Authors:  Ashley Quinto; Sandy Abu El Adas; Susannah V Levi
Journal:  Cogn Sci       Date:  2020-10

8.  Effects of language experience and task demands on talker recognition by children and adults.

Authors:  Natalie Fecher; Elizabeth K Johnson
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2018-04       Impact factor: 1.840

9.  Preschool impairments in auditory processing and speech perception uniquely predict future reading problems.

Authors:  Bart Boets; Maaike Vandermosten; Hanne Poelmans; Heleen Luts; Jan Wouters; Pol Ghesquière
Journal:  Res Dev Disabil       Date:  2011-01-13

10.  Human voice recognition depends on language ability.

Authors:  Tyler K Perrachione; Stephanie N Del Tufo; John D E Gabrieli
Journal:  Science       Date:  2011-07-29       Impact factor: 47.728

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.