Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-2n9c9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-14T07:59:19.119Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

No compelling evidence against feedbackin spoken word recognition

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 October 2000

Michael K. Tanenhaus
Affiliation:
Department of Brain and Cognitive Sciences, University of Rochester, Rochester, NY 14627 {mtan; magnuson; mcmurray}@bcs.rochester.edu aslin@cvs.rochester.edu www.bcs.rochester.edu
James S. Magnuson
Affiliation:
Department of Brain and Cognitive Sciences, University of Rochester, Rochester, NY 14627 {mtan; magnuson; mcmurray}@bcs.rochester.edu aslin@cvs.rochester.edu www.bcs.rochester.edu
Bob McMurray
Affiliation:
Department of Brain and Cognitive Sciences, University of Rochester, Rochester, NY 14627 {mtan; magnuson; mcmurray}@bcs.rochester.edu aslin@cvs.rochester.edu www.bcs.rochester.edu
Richard N. Aslin
Affiliation:
Department of Brain and Cognitive Sciences, University of Rochester, Rochester, NY 14627 {mtan; magnuson; mcmurray}@bcs.rochester.edu aslin@cvs.rochester.edu www.bcs.rochester.edu
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the 'Save PDF' action button.

Norris et al.'s claim that feedback is unnecessary is compromised by (1) a questionable application of Occam's razor, given strong evidence for feedback in perception; (2) an idealization of the speech recognition problem that simplifies those aspects of the input that create conditions where feedback is useful; (3) Norris et al.'s use of decision nodes that incorporate feedback to model some important empirical results; and (4) problematic linking hypotheses between crucial simulations and behavioral data.

Information

Type
Brief Report
Copyright
© 2000 Cambridge University Press