Skip to main content Accessibility help

Second-language spoken word identification: Effects of perceptual training, visual cues, and phonetic environment



Experiments using the gating paradigm investigated the effects of auditory–visual (AV) and auditory-only perceptual training on second-language spoken-word identification by Japanese and Korean learners of English. Stimuli were familiar bisyllabic words beginning with /p/, /f/, //, /l/, and /s, t, k/ combined with high, low, and rounded vowels. Results support the priming role of visual cues in AV speech processing. Identification was earlier with visual cues and following training, especially for words beginning with // and /l/, which also showed significant effects of adjacent vowel. For the Japanese, the AV advantage in identifying //- and /l/-initial words was accentuated following training. Findings are discussed within a multimodal episodic model of learning.


Corresponding author

Debra M. Hardison, Michigan State University, Department of Linguistics and Languages, A-714 Wells Hall, East Lansing, MI 48824. E-mail:


Hide All
Bard E., Shillcock R., & Altmann G. 1988. The recognition of words after their acoustic offsets in spontaneous speech: Effects of subsequent context. Perception & Psychophysics, 44, 395408.
Benguerel A.-P., & Pichora–Fuller M. K. 1982. Coarticulation effects in lipreading. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 25, 600607.
Berger K. W. 1972. Speechreading: Principles and methods. Baltimore, MD: National Education Press.
Cho Y.-M. Y. 1987. Phrasal phonology of Korean. In S. Kuno, I.-H. Lee, J. Whitman, S.-Y. Bak, & Y.-S. Kang (Eds.), Harvard studies in Korean linguistics II (pp. 328340). Cambridge MA: Harvard University, Department of Linguistics.
Cotton S., & Grosjean F. 1984. The gating paradigm: A comparison of successive and individual presentation formats. Perception & Psychophysics, 35, 4148.
Daniloff R. G., & Moll K. 1968. Coarticulation of lip rounding. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 11, 707721.
Goldinger S. D. 1997. Words and voices: Perception and production in an episodic lexicon. In K. Johnson & J. W. Mullennix (Eds.), Talker variability in speech processing (pp. 3366). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Goldinger S. D., Luce P. A., & Pisoni D. B. 1989. Priming lexical neighbors of spoken words: Effects of competition and inhibition. Journal of Memory and Language, 28, 501518.
Grosjean F. 1980. Spoken word recognition processes and the gating paradigm. Perception & Psychophysics, 28, 267283.
Grosjean F. 1985. The recognition of words after their acoustic offset: Evidence and implications. Perception & Psychophysics, 38, 299310.
Grosjean F. 1996. Gating. Language and Cognitive Processes, 11, 597604.
Hagiwara R. E. 1995. Acoustic realizations of American /r/ as produced by women and men (Doctoral dissertation, University of California, Los Angeles, 1995). UCLA Working Papers in Phonetics No. 90.
Hardison D. M. 1999. Bimodal speech perception by native and nonnative speakers of English: Factors influencing the McGurk effect. Language Learning, 49, 213283.
Hardison D. M. 2000. The neurocognitive foundation of second-language speech: A proposed scenario of bimodal development. In B. Swierzbin, F. Morris, M. E. Anderson, C. A. Klee, & E. Tarone (Eds.), Social and cognitive factors in second language acquisition (pp. 312325). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.
Hardison D. M. 2003. Acquisition of second-language speech: Effects of visual cues, context and talker variability. Applied Psycholinguistics, 24, 495522.
Hatch E., & Lazaraton A. 1991. The research manual: Design and statistics for applied linguistics. New York: Newbury House.
Hintzman D. L. 1986. “Schema abstraction” in a multiple-trace memory model. Psychological Review, 93, 411428.
Jacoby L., & Brooks L. R. 1984. Nonanalytic cognition: Memory, perception, and concept learning. In G. Bower (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 18, pp. 147). New York: Academic Press.
Jusczyk P. W. 1993. From general to language-specific capacities: The WRAPSA model of how speech perception develops. Journal of Phonetics, 21, 328.
Kim–Renaud Y.-K. 1974. Korean consonantal phonology (Doctoral dissertation, The University of Hawaii, 1974). Dissertation Abstracts International, 36, 869.
Kricos P. B., & Lesner S. A. 1982. Differences in visual intelligibility across talkers. Volta Review, 84, 219225.
Lively S. E., Logan J. S., & Pisoni D. B. 1993. Training Japanese listeners to identify English /r/ and /l/: II: The role of phonetic environment and talker variability in learning new perceptual categories. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 94, 12421255.
Luce P. A. 1986. Neighborhoods of words in the mental lexicon. Research on speech perception (Tech. Rep. No. 6). Bloomington, IN: Indiana University.
Marslen–Wilson W. D., & Welsh A. 1978. Processing interactions and lexical access during word-recognition in continuous speech. Cognitive Psychology, 10, 2963.
Massaro D. W. 1987. Speech perception by ear and eye: A paradigm for psychological inquiry. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Massaro D. W. 1998. Perceiving talking faces: From speech perception to a behavioral principle. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
McGurk H., & MacDonald J. 1976. Hearing lips and seeing voices. Nature, 264, 746748.
Munhall K. G., & Tohkura Y. 1998. Audiovisual gating and the time course of speech perception. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 104, 530539.
Owens E., & Blazek B. 1985. Visemes observed by hearing-impaired and normal-hearing adult viewers. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 28, 381393.
Pisoni D. B. 1993. Long-term memory in speech perception: Some new findings on talker variability, speaking rate and perceptual learning. Speech Communication, 13, 109125.
Price P. J. 1981. A cross-linguistic study of flaps in Japanese and in American English (Doctoral dissertation, University of Pennsylvania, 1981). Dissertation Abstracts International, 42, 1128A.
Rosenblum L. D. 2002. The perceptual basis for audiovisual speech integration. In J. H. L. Hansen & B. Pellom (Eds.), International Conference on Spoken Language Processing 2002 (pp. 14611464). Sydney, Australia: Causal Productions Pty, Ltd.
Salasoo A., & Pisoni D. B. 1985. Interaction of knowledge sources in spoken word identification. Journal of Memory and Language, 24, 210231.
Sekiyama K., & Sugita Y. 2002. Auditory–visual speech perception examined by brain imaging and reaction time. In J. H. L. Hansen & B. Pellom (Eds.), ICSLP 2002 (pp. 16931696). Sydney, Australia: Causal Productions PTY, Ltd.
Shin S.-H. 1997. Correspondence in Kyungsang Korean truncation. In S. Davis (Ed.), Optimal Viewpoints (pp. 115138). Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Linguistics Club Publications.
Silva D. J. 1989. Korean obstruent voicing: Investigations into prosodic structuring. In S. Kuno, I.-H. Lee, J. Whitman, S.-Y. Bak, & Y.-S. Kang (Eds.), Harvard studies in Korean linguistics III (pp. 177188). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University, Department of Linguistics.
Smeele P. M. T. 1994. Perceiving speech: Integrating auditory and visual speech. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Delft University of Technology, Delft.
Summerfield Q. 1979. Use of visual information for phonetic perception. Phonetica, 26, 314331.
Tsujimura N. 1996. An introduction to Japanese linguistics. Oxford: Blackwell.
Tyler L., & Wessels J. 1985. Is gating an on-line task? Evidence from naming latency data. Perception & Psychophysics, 38, 217222.
Vance T. J. 1987. An introduction to Japanese phonology. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
Walker S., Bruce V., & O'Malley C. 1995. Facial identity and facial speech processing: Familiar faces and voices in the McGurk effect. Perception & Psychophysics, 57, 11241133.
Woodward M. F., & Barber C. G. 1960. Phoneme perception in lip reading. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 3, 212222.

Related content

Powered by UNSILO

Second-language spoken word identification: Effects of perceptual training, visual cues, and phonetic environment



Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed.