Psycholinguistic Aspects

doi:10.1017/9781108644198.018

17 - Psycholinguistic Aspects

from Section IV - Audition and Perception

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 11 November 2021

Meghan Sumner and

Seung Kyung Kim

Edited by

Rachael-Anne Knight and

Jane Setter

Show author details

Rachael-Anne Knight: Affiliation:
City, University of London
Jane Setter: Affiliation:
University of Reading

Book contents

Get access

Summary

This chapter provides an overview of research that combines phonetics and psycholinguistics. It underscores a number of papers that highlight a story about the history, issues and trends in the field. In doing so, papers that can serve as good pointers to different subfields are examined. The chapter oscillates between foundational work and more recent work, hoping that it can provide a broad introduction to this area of research. This chapter particularly focuses on issues that merge phonetic variation, spoken word recognition, memory, and sociolinguistics. Research in this area has not only raised questions about the assumptions made about how listeners understand spoken language, but is also ripe for investigations that have a broad impact across psychology and linguistics more generally.

Keywords

experience-based models memory phonetic variation social factors sociolinguistics spoken word recognition

Information

Type: Chapter
Information: The Cambridge Handbook of Phonetics , pp. 430 - 456
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108644198.018 [Opens in a new window]
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2021

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.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

17.7 References

Allen, J. S. & Miller, J. L. (2004). Listener sensitivity to individual talker differences in voice-onset-time. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 115(6), 3171–83.CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Andruski, J. E., Blumstein, S. E. & Burton, M. (1994). The effect of subphonetic differences on lexical access. Cognition, 52(3), 163–87.Google Scholar

Bowers, J. S. (2000). In defense of abstractionist theories of repetition priming and word identification. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 7(1), 83–99.Google Scholar

Bradlow, A. R., Nygaard, L. C. & Pisoni, D. B. (1999). Effects of talker, rater, and amplitude variation on recognition memory for spoken words. Perception & Psychophysics, 61(2), 206–19.Google Scholar

Cai, Z. G., Gilbert, R. A., Davis, M. H., Gaskell, M. G., Farrar, L., Adler, S. et al. (2017). Accent modulates access to word meaning: Evidence for a speaker-model account of spoken word recognition. Cognitive Psychology, 98, 73–101.CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Campbell-Kibler, K. (2007). Accent, (ING), and the social logic of listener perceptions. American Speech, 82(1), 32–64.Google Scholar

Campbell-Kibler, K. (2009). The nature of sociolinguistic perception. Language Variation and Change, 21, 135–56.Google Scholar

Church, B. A. & Schacter, D. L. (1994). Perceptual specificity of auditory priming: Implicit memory for voice intonation and fundamental frequency. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 20(3), 521–33.Google Scholar

Clayards, M., Tanenhaus, M., Aslin, R. & Jacobs, R. (2008). Perception of speech reflects optimal use of probabilistic speech cues. Cognition, 108, 804–9.Google Scholar

Connine, C. M. (2004). It’s not what you hear but how often you hear it: On the neglected role of phonological variant frequency in auditory word recognition. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 11(6), 1084–9.Google Scholar

Cooper, A., Brouwer, S. & Bradlow, A. R. (2015). Interdependent processing and encoding of speech and concurrent background noise. Attention, Perception & Psychophysics, 77(4), 1342–57.Google Scholar

Creel, S. C., Aslin, R. N. & Tanenhaus, M. K. (2012). Word learning under adverse listening conditions: Context-specific recognition. Language and Cognitive Processes, 27, 1021–38.Google Scholar

Dahan, D., Drucker, S. J. & Scarborough, R. A. (2008). Talker adaptation in speech perception: Adjusting the signal or the representations? Cognition, 108(3), 710–18.CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Dilley, L., Wieland, E., Gamache, J., McAuley, J. D. & Redford, M. (2013). Age-related changes to spectral voice characteristics affect judgments of prosodic, segmental, and talker attributes for child and adult speech. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 56, 159–77.CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

D’Onofrio, A. (2015). Perceiving personae: Effects of social information on perceptions of TRAP-backing. University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics, 21(2), 31–9.Google Scholar

D’Onofrio, A. (in press). Sociolinguistic signs as cognitive representations. In Hall-Lew, L., Podesva, E. &Moore, R. J., eds., Social Meaning in Linguistic Variation: Theorizing the Third Wave. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Dumay, N. & Gaskell, M. G. (2005). Do words go to sleep? Exploring consolidation of spoken forms through direct and indirect measures. Behavioural and Brain Sciences, 28, 69–70.Google Scholar

Dumay, N. & Gaskell, M. G. (2007). Sleep-associated changes in the mental representation of spoken words. Psychological Science, 18, 35–9.Google Scholar

Eckert, P. (2008). Variation and the indexical field. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 12(4), 453–76.Google Scholar

Eckert, P. (2012). Three waves of variation study: The emergence of meaning in the study of sociolinguistic variation. Annual Review of Anthropology, 41(1), 87–100.Google Scholar

Freeman, J. B. & Ambady, N. (2011). A dynamic interactive theory of person construal. Psychological Review, 118(2), 247–79.Google Scholar

Ganong, W. F. (1980). Phonetic categorization in auditory word perception. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 6(1), 110–25.Google Scholar

Gaskell, M. G. & Marslen-Wilson, W. D. (1996). Phonological variation and inference in lexical access. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 22(1), 144–58.Google Scholar

Goh, W. D. (2005). Talker variability and recognition memory: Instance-specific and voice-specific effects. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 31(1), 40–53.Google Scholar

Goldinger, S. D. (1996). Words and voices: Episodic traces in spoken word identification and recognition memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 22(5), 1166–83.Google Scholar

Goldinger, S. D. (1998). Echoes of echoes: An episodic theory of lexical access. Psychological Review, 105, 251–79.CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Gordon, M., Barthmaier, P. & Sands, K. (2002). A cross-linguistic acoustic study of voiceless fricatives. Journal of the International Phonetic Association, 32(2), 141–74.Google Scholar

Gow, D. W. (2001). Assimilation and anticipation in continuous spoken word recognition. Journal of Memory and Language, 45(1), 133–59.Google Scholar

Gow, D. W. (2002). Does English coronal place assimilation create lexical ambiguity? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 28(1), 163–79.Google Scholar

Gow, D. W. (2003). Feature parsing: Feature cue mapping in spoken word recognition. Perception & Psychophysics, 65(4), 575–90.Google Scholar

Gow, D. W. & Im, A. M. (2004). A cross-linguistic examination of assimilation context effects. Journal of Memory and Language, 51(2), 279–96.Google Scholar

Grossberg, S. (2013). Adaptive Resonance Theory: How a brain learns to consciously attend, learn, and recognize a changing world. Neural Networks, 37, 1–47.Google Scholar

Halpern, D. F. & Hakel, M. D. (2003). Applying the science of learning to the university and beyond. Change Magazine. July/August, pp. 36–41.CrossRef Google Scholar

Hay, J., Podlubny, R., Drager, K. & McAuliffe, M. (2017). Car-talk: Location-specific speech production and perception. Journal of Phonetics, 65, 94–109.Google Scholar

Howe, M. L., Wimmer, M. C., Gagnon, N. & Plumpton, S. (2009). An associative-activation theory of children’s and adults’ memory illusions. Journal of Memory and Language, 60, 229–51.CrossRef Google Scholar

Johnson, K. (1997). Speech perception without speaker normalization: An exemplar model. In Johnson, K. & Mullennix, J. W., eds., Talker Variability in Speech Processing. San Diego, CA: Academic Press, pp. 145–65.Google Scholar

Johnson, K. (2005). Speaker normalization in speech perception. In Pisoni, D. B. & Remez, R. E., eds., The Handbook of Speech Perception. Malden, MA: Blackwell, pp. 363–89.Google Scholar

Johnson, K. (2006). Resonance in an exemplar-based lexicon: The emergence of social identity and phonology. Journal of Phonetics, 34, 485–99.Google Scholar

Keating, P. A. (1998). Word-level phonetic variation in large speech corpora. In A. Alexiadou, N. Fuhrop, U. Kleinhenz & P. Law, eds., ZAS Papers in Linguistics, 11, 35–50.Google Scholar

Kim, S. K. (2015). Speech, Variation, and Meaning: The Effects of Emotional Prosody on Word Recognition. PhD thesis, Stanford University.Google Scholar

Kim, S. K. & Sumner, M. (2017). Beyond lexical meaning: The effect of emotional prosody on spoken word recognition. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 142(1), EL49–55.Google Scholar

King, E. & Sumner, M. (2015). Voice-specific effects in semantic association. Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, 37, 1111–16.Google Scholar

Klatt, D. H. (1979). Speech perception: A model of acoustic-phonetic analysis and lexical access. Journal of Phonetics, 7, 279–312.Google Scholar

Kleinschmidt, D. F. & Jaeger, T. F. (2015). Robust speech perception: Recognize the familiar, generalize to the similar, and adapt to the novel. Psychological Review, 122(2), 148–203.Google Scholar

Kong, E. J., Kang, S. & Seo, M. (2014). Gender difference in the affricate productions of young Seoul Korean speakers. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 136(4), EL329–EL335.CrossRef Google Scholar

Kraljic, T. & Samuel, A. G. (2006). Generalization in perceptual learning for speech. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 13(2), 262–8.Google Scholar

Kumaran, D. and McClelland, J. L. (2012). Generalization through the recurrent interaction of episodic memories: A model of the hippocampal system. Psychological Review 119(3), 573–616.CrossRef Google Scholar

Ladefoged, P. & Broadbent, D. E. (1960). Perception of sequence in auditory events. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 12(3), 162–70.Google Scholar

Lahiri, A. & Marslen-Wilson, W. (1991). The mental representation of lexical form: A phonological approach to the recognition lexicon. Cognition, 38, 245–94.Google Scholar

Liberman, A. M. & Mattingly, I. G. (1985). The motor theory of speech perception revised. Cognition, 21(1), 1–36.Google Scholar

Liberman, A. M., Cooper, F. S., Shankweiler, D. P. & Studdert-Kennedy, M. (1967). Perception of the speech code. Psychological Review, 74(6), 431–61.Google Scholar

Lindblom, B. E. & Studdert‐Kennedy, M. (1967). On the role of formant transitions in vowel recognition. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 42(4), 830–43.Google Scholar

Lindblom, B. (1990). Explaining phonetic variation: A sketch of the H&H theory. In Hardcastle, W. J. & Marchal, A., eds., Speech Production and Speech Modeling. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, pp. 403–39.Google Scholar

LoCasto, P. C. & Connine, C. M. (2002). Rule-governed missing information in spoken word recognition: Schwa vowel deletion. Perception & Psychophysics, 64(2), 208–19.Google Scholar

LoCasto, P. C. & Connine, C. M. (2011). Processing of no-release variants in connected speech. Language and Speech, 54(2), 181–97.Google Scholar

Luce, P. A. & Lyons, E. (1998). Specificity of memory representation for spoken words. Memory & Cognition, 26, 708–15.Google Scholar

Luce, P. A. & McLennan, C. T. (2005). Spoken word recognition: The challenge of variation. In Pisoni, D. B. & Remez, R. E., eds., The Handbook of Speech Perception. Malden, MA: Wiley.Google Scholar

Maida, C. (2014). Project-based learning: A critical pedagogy for the twenty-first century. Policy Futures in Education, 9, 759–68.Google Scholar

Marslen-Wilson, W. & Warren, P. (1994). Levels of perceptual representation and process in lexical access: Words, phonemes, and features. Psychological Review, 101(4), 653.Google Scholar

Marslen-Wilson, W., Nix, A. & Gaskell, G. (1995). Phonological variation in lexical access: Abstractness, inference and English place assimilation. Language and Cognitive Processes, 10, 285–308.Google Scholar

Mattys, S. L., Davis, M. H., Bradlow, A. R. & Scott, S. K. (2012). Speech recognition in adverse conditions: A review. Language and Cognitive Processes, 27(7–8), 953–78.Google Scholar

Maye, J., Asline, R. N. & Tanenhaus, M. K. (2008). The weckud wetch of the wast: Lexical adaptation to a novel accent. Cognitive Science, 32(3), 543–62.Google Scholar

McClelland, J. L. & Elman, J. L. (1986). The TRACE model of speech perception. Cognitive Psychology, 18, 1–86.Google Scholar

McGowan, K. B. & Sumner, M. (2014). The effect of contextual mismatches on lexical activation of phonetic variants. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 135(4), 2199.CrossRef Google Scholar

Niedzielski, N. (1999). The effect of social information on the perception of sociolinguistic variables. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 18(1), 62–85.Google Scholar

Noelle, D. C., Dale, R., Warlaumont, A. S., Yoshimi, J., Matlock, T., Jennings, C. D. et al. (2015). Proceedings of the 37th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society. Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society.Google Scholar

Norris, D. (1994). Shortlist: A connectionist model of continuous speech recognition. Cognition, 52(3), 189–234.Google Scholar

Norris, D., McQueen, J. M. & Cutler, A. (2003). Perceptual learning in speech. Cognitive Psychology, 47(2), 204–38.Google Scholar

Nygaard, L. C. & Lunders, E. R. (2002). Resolution of lexical ambiguity by emotional tone of voice. Memory & Cognition, 30(4), 583–93.Google Scholar

Nygaard, L. C. & Pisoni, D. B. (1998). Talker-specific learning in speech perception. Perception & Psychophysics, 60(3), 355–76.Google Scholar

Otgaar, H., Peters, M. & Howe, M. L. (2012). Dividing attention lowers children’s, but increases adults’ false memories. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 38(1), 204–10.Google Scholar

Palmeri, T. J., Goldinger, S. D. & Pisoni, D. B. (1993). Episodic encoding of voice attributes and recognition memory for spoken words. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 19(2), 309–28.Google Scholar

Pierrehumbert, J. B. (2001). Exemplar dynamics: Word frequency, lenition and contrast. In Bybee, J. & Hopper, P., eds., Frequency Effects and the Emergence of Linguistic Structure. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 137–58.Google Scholar

Pierrehumbert, J. B. (2016). Phonological representation: Beyond abstract versus episodic. Annual Review of Linguistics, 2, 33–52.Google Scholar

Pitt, M. A. (2009). The strength and time course of lexical activation of pronunciation variants. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 35(3), 896–910.Google Scholar

Pufahl, A. & Samuel, A. G. (2014). How lexical is the lexicon? Evidence for integrated auditory memory representations. Cognitive Psychology, 70, 1–30.Google Scholar

Salverda, A. P., Kleinschmidt, D. & Tanenhaus, M. K. (2014). Immediate effects of anticipatory coarticulation in spoken-word recognition. Journal of Memory and Language, 71(1), 145–63.Google Scholar

Samuel, A. G. & Kraljic, T. (2009). Perceptual learning for speech. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 71(6), 1207–18.Google Scholar

Schacter, D. L. & Church, B. A. (1992). Auditory priming: Implicit and explicit memory for words and voices. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 18(5), 915–30.Google Scholar

Steen, S., Bader, C. & Kubrin, C. (1999). Rethinking the graduate seminar. Teaching Sociology, 27(2), 167–73.Google Scholar

Strand, E. A. (2000). Gender Stereotype Effects in Speech Processing. Doctoral dissertation, Ohio State University.Google Scholar

Strori, D., Zaar, J., Cooke, M. & Mattys, S. L. (2018). Sound specificity effects in spoken word recognition: The effect of integrality between words and sounds. Attention, Perception & Psychophysics, 80, 222–41.Google Scholar

Sumner, M. (2015). The social weight of spoken words. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 19(5), 238–9.CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Sumner, M., and Kataoka, R. (2013). Effects of phonetically cued talker variation on semantic-encoding. Journal of Acoustical Society of America, 134, EL485–491.Google Scholar

Sumner, M. & Samuel, A. G. (2007). Lexical inhibition and sublexical facilitation are surprisingly long lasting. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 33(4), 769–90.Google Scholar

Sumner, M. & Samuel, A. G. (2009). The effect of experience on the perception and representation of dialect variants. Journal of Memory and Language, 60, 487–501.Google Scholar

Sumner, M., Kurumada, C., Gafter, R. & Casillas, M. (2013). Phonetic variation and the recognition of words with pronunciation variants. Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, 35, 3486–91.Google Scholar

Sumner, M., Kim, S. K., King, E. & McGowan, K. B. (2014). The socially weighted encoding of spoken words: A dual-route approach to speech perception. Frontiers in Psychology, 4(January), 1–13.Google Scholar

Toscano, J. C. & McMurray, B. (2010). Cue integration with categories: Weighting acoustic cues in speech using unsupervised learning and distributional statistics. Cognitive Science, 34, 434–64.Google Scholar

Toscano, J. C. & McMurray, B. (2015). The time-course of speaking rate compensation: effects of sentential rate and vowel length on voicing judgments. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 30(5), 529–43.CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Vitevitch, M. S. (2003). Change deafness: The inability to detect changes between two voices. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 29, 333–42.Google Scholar

Warren, P. (2016). Uptalk: The Phenomenon of Rising Intonation, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Zhao, Y. (2009). Statistical Inference in Learning of Novel Phonetic Categories. Doctoral dissertation, Stanford University, CA.Google Scholar

Accessibility standard: Unknown

Why this information is here

This section outlines the accessibility features of this content - including support for screen readers, full keyboard navigation and high-contrast display options. This may not be relevant for you.

Accessibility Information

Accessibility compliance for the HTML of this chapter is currently unknown and may be updated in the future.