Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-22dnz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T12:01:16.464Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Word recognition from acoustic onsets and acoustic offsets: Effects of cohort size and syllabic stress

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 November 2008

Arthur Wingfield ,
Harold Goodglass  and
Kimberly C. Lindfield
Arthur Wingfield
Affiliation:
Brandeis University
Harold Goodglass
Affiliation:
Boston University School of Medicine
Kimberly C. Lindfield*
Affiliation:
Boston University School of Medicine
*
Arthur Wingfield, Volen National Center for Complex Systems, Brandeis University, Waltham, MA 02254-9110. email: wingfield@volen.brandeis.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In the traditional gating technique, subjects hear increasing amounts of word-onset information from spoken words until the words can be correctly identified. The experiment reported here contrasted word-onset gating with results when words were gated from their word endings. A significant recognition advantage for words gated from their onsets was demonstrated. This effect was eliminated, however, when we took into account the number of word possibilities that shared overlapping phonology and the same stress pattern as the target words at their recognition points. These results support the position that the perceptual advantage of word-initial information can be understood within a general goodness-of-fit model of spoken word recognition.

Type
Articles
Information
Applied Psycholinguistics , Volume 18 , Issue 1 , January 1997 , pp. 85 - 100
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1997

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Burke, D. M., MacKay, D. G., Worthley, J. S., & Wade, E. (1991). On the tip-of-the-tongue: What causes word finding failures in young and older adults. Journal of Memory and Language. 30, 542–579.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burton, M. (1992, November). Syllable priming in auditory word recognition. Paper presented at the 33rd annual meeting of the Psychonomics Society, St. Louis, MO.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cole, R. A., & Jakimik, J. (1980). A model of speech perception. In Cole, R. (Ed.), Perception and production of fluent speech (pp. 133–163). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Connine, C. M., Blasko, D. G., & Titone, D. (1993). Do the beginnings of spoken words have a special status in auditory word recognition? Journal of Memory and Language, 32, 193–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cotton, S., & Grosjean, F. (1984). The gating paradigm: A comparison of successive and individual presentation formats. Perception and Psychophysics, 35, 41–48.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Forster, K. I. (1979). Levels of processing and the structure of the language processor. In Cooper, W. E. & Walker, E. C. T. (Eds.), Sentence processing: Psycholinguistic studies presented to Merrill Garrett (pp. 27–85). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Francis, W., & Kucera, H. (1982). Frequency analysis of English usage: Lexicon and grammar. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
Fromkin, V., & Rodman, R. (1988). An introduction to language (4th ed.). New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.Google Scholar
Gibbons, J. D. (1993). Nonparametric statistics. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goodglass, H., Wingfield, A., Hyde, M. R., Gleason, J. B., Bowles, N. L., & Gallagher, R. E. (1997). The importance of word-initial phonology: Error patterns in prolonged naming efforts by aphasic patients. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, 3, 1–11.Google Scholar
Grosjean, F. (1980). Spoken word recognition processes and the gating paradigm. Perception and Psychophysics, 28, 267–283.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Grosjean, F. (1985). The recognition of words after their acoustic offset: Evidence and implications. Perception and Psychophysics, 38, 299–310.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kelly, M. H. (1992). Using sound to solve syntactic problems: The role of phonology in grammatical category assignments. Psychological Review, 99, 349–364.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kohn, S. E., Wingfield, A., Menn, L., Goodglass, H., Gleason, J. B., & Hyde, M. (1987). Lexical retrieval: The tip of the tongue phenomenon. Applied Psycholinguistics, 8, 245–266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lahri, A., & Marslen-Wilson, W. D. (1991). The mental representation of lexical form: A phonological approach to the recognition lexicon. Cognition, 38, 245–294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levelt, W. J. M. (1992). Accessing words in speech production: Stages, processes and representation. Cognition, 42, 1–22.Google Scholar
Lieberman, P. (1963). Some effects of semantic and grammatical context on the production and perception of speech. Language and Speech, 6, 172–187.Google Scholar
Luce, P. A. (1986). A computational analysis of uniqueness points in auditory word recognition. Perception and Psychophysics, 39, 155–158.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Marslen-Wilson, W. D. (1984). Function and process in spoken word recognition. In Bouma, H. & Bouwhuis, D. G. (Eds.), Attention and performance X: The control of language processes (pp. 125–150). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Marslen-Wilson, W. D. (1987). Parallel processing in spoken word recognition. Cognition, 25, 71–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marslen-Wilson, W. D. (1990). Activation, competition, and frequency in lexical access. In Altmann, G. T. M. (Ed.), Cognitive models of speech processing (pp. 148–172). Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Marslen-Wilson, W. D., & Zwitserlood, P. (1989). Accessing spoken words: The importance of word onsets. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 15, 576–585.Google Scholar
McClelland, J. L. (1987). The case for interactionism in language processing. In Coltheart, M. (Ed.), Attention and performance, XII: The psychology of reading (pp. 3–36). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
McClelland, J. L., & Elman, J. L. (1986). The TRACE model of speech perception. Cognitive Psychology, 18, 1–86.Google Scholar
Milberg, W., Blumstein, S., & Dworetzky, B. (1988). Phonological factors in lexical access: Evidence from an auditory lexical decision task. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 26, 305–308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, J. L., & Eimas, P. D. (1995). Speech perception: From signal to word. Annual Review of Psychology, 46, 467–492.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Morton, J. (1969). Interaction of information in word recognition. Psychological Review, 76, 165–178.Google Scholar
Nicholas, M., Obler, L., Albert, M., & Goodglass, H. (1985). Lexical retrieval in healthy aging. Cortex, 21, 595–606.Google Scholar
Nooteboom, S. G., & Doodeman, G. J. N. (1984). Speech quality and the gating paradigm. In van den Broeke, M. P. R. & Cohen, A. (Eds.), Proceedings of the Tenth International Congress of Phonetic Sciences (pp. 481–485). Dordrect: Foris.Google Scholar
Nooteboom, S. G., & van der Vlugt, M. J. (1988). A search for a word beginning superiority effect. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 84, 2018–2032.Google Scholar
Pease, D. M., & Goodglass, H. (1978). The effects of cuing on picture naming in aphasia. Cortex, 14. 178–189.Google Scholar
Pickett, J. M., & Pollack, I. (1963). Intelligibility of excerpts from fluent speech: Effects of rate of utterance and duration of excerpt. Language and Speech, 6, 151–164.Google Scholar
Salasoo, A., & Pisoni, D. (1985). Interaction of knowledge sources in spoken word identification. Journal of Memory and Language, 24, 210–231.Google Scholar
Slowiaczek, L. M., Nusbaum, H. C., & Pisoni, D. B. (1987). Phonological priming in auditory word recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 13, 64–75.Google Scholar
Tun, P. A., Wingfield, A., Stine, E. A. L., & Mecsas, C. (1992). Rapid speech processing and divided attention: Processing rate versus processing resources as an explanation of age effects. Psychology and Aging, 4, 546–550.Google Scholar
Tyler, L. K. (1984). The structure of the initial cohort: Evidence from gating. Perception and Psychophysics, 36, 417–427.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Walley, A. C. (1988). Spoken word recognition by young children and adults. Cognitive Development, 3, 137–165.Google Scholar
Wayland, S. C, Wingfield, A., & Goodglass, H. (1989). Recognition of isolated words: The dynamics of cohort reduction. Applied Psycholinguistics, 10, 475–487.Google Scholar
Wingfield, A., Alexander, A. H., & Cavigelli, S. (1994). Does memory constrain utilization of top-down information in spoken word recognition? Evidence from normal aging. Language and Speech, 37, 221–235.Google Scholar
Wingfield, A., Goodglass, H., & Smith, K. L. (1990). Effects of word-onset cuing on picture naming in aphasia: A reconsideration. Brain and Language, 39, 373–390.Google Scholar
Wingfield, A., Poon, L. W., Lombardi, L., & Lowe, D. (1985). Speed of processing in normal aging: Effects of speech rate, linguistic structure and processing time. Journal of Gerontology, 40, 579–585.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zwitserlood, P. (1989). The locus of effects of sentential-semantic context in spoken-word processing. Cognition, 32, 25–64.Google Scholar