Presentations

Abstract

This study aims to test recent theoretical frameworks in speech motor control which claim that speech production targets are specified in auditory terms. According to such frameworks, people with better auditory acuity should have more precise speech targets. Participants performed speech perception and production tasks in a counterbalanced order. Speech perception acuity was assessed using an adaptive speech discrimination task, where participants discriminated between stimuli on a /ɪ/-/ɛ/ and a /ɑ/-/ɔ/ continuum. To assess variability in speech production, participants performed a pseudo-word reading task; formant values were measured for each recording of the vowels /ɪ/, /ɛ/, /ɑ/ and /ɔ/ in 288 pseudowords (18 per vowel, each of which was repeated 4 times). We predicted that speech production variability would correlate inversely with discrimination performance. Results confirmed this prediction as better discriminators had more distinctive vowel production targets. In addition, participants with higher auditory acuity produced vowels with smaller within-phoneme variability but spaced farther apart in vowel space. This study highlights the importance of individual differences in the study of speech motor control, and sheds light on speech production-perception interactions.

Abstract

This study aims to test a prediction of recent
theoretical frameworks in speech motor control: if
speech production targets are specified in auditory
terms, people with better auditory acuity should
have more precise speech targets.
To investigate this, we had participants perform
speech perception and production tasks in a
counterbalanced order. To assess speech perception
acuity, we used an adaptive speech discrimination
task. To assess variability in speech production,
participants performed a pseudo-word reading task;
formant values were measured for each recording.
We predicted that speech production variability to
correlate inversely with discrimination performance.
The results suggest that people do vary in their
production and perceptual abilities, and that better
discriminators have more distinctive vowel
production targets, confirming our prediction. This
study highlights the importance of individual
differences in the study of speech motor control, and
sheds light on speech production-perception
interaction.

Abstract

In investigations of feedback control during speech production, researchers have focused on two different kinds of responses to erroneous or unexpected auditory feedback. Compensation refers to online, feedback-based corrections of articulations. In contrast, adaptation refers to long-term changes in the speech production system after exposure to erroneous/unexpected feedback, which may last even after feedback is normal again. In the current study, we aimed to compare both types of feedback responses by investigating the conditions under which the system starts adapting in addition to merely compensating. Participants vocalized long vowels while they were exposed to either consistently altered auditory feedback, or to feedback that was unpredictably either altered or normal. Participants were not aware of the manipulation of auditory feedback. We predicted that both conditions would elicit compensation, whereas adaptation would be stronger when the altered feedback was consistent across trials. The results show that although there seems to be somewhat more adaptation for the consistently altered feedback condition, a substantial amount of individual variability led to statistically unreliable effects at the group level. The results stress the importance of taking into account individual differences and show that people vary widely in how they respond to altered auditory feedback.

Abstract

Numerous studies have shown that listeners can adapt to idiosyncratic pronunciations through lexically-guided perceptual learning. For instance, an ambiguous sound between [s] and [f] (s/f) will be learned as /s/ if heard in words such as platypus, but as /f/ in words such as giraffe. This learning generalises, so that listeners hear [nais/f] as nice or knife depending on the exposure condition (platypus/f vs. giras/f). Previous research focused on contrasts that differ only in local cues, such as plosives and fricatives. We investigated here whether perceptual learning also occurs for contrasts that differ in nonlocal cues (distributed over the syllable), such as the /l/-/r/ contrast in Dutch (implemented as [l] vs. [ɹ] in the Western part of the Netherlands). Listeners were exposed to an ambiguous [l/ɹ] in Dutch words ending in either /r/ or /l/. The ambiguous sound was created by morphing [əɹ] and [əl] syllables to capture the contrast’s distributed nature. A subsequent test phase revealed a significant difference in /r/-responses to a [əɹ]-[əl] continuum between the groups that learned to interpret the ambiguous sound as either /r/ or /l/. We then went on to test whether learning generalises over allophonic differences. If so, exposure should influence the perception of another implementation of the contrast: that with a trilled /r/ ([ər]-[əl]), tested in both post- and pre-vocalic position (pre-vocalic approximants are not attested in Dutch). Preliminary results show that training effects reduce when different allophones are used during test, suggesting that the learning effect has an allophonic basis.

Abstract

Understanding speech usually seems easy, but it can become noticeably harder when the speaker has a foreign accent. This is because foreign accents add considerable variation to speech. Research on foreign-accented speech shows that participants are able to adapt quickly to this type of variation. Less is known, however, about longer-term maintenance of adaptation. The current study focused on long-term adaptation by exposing native listeners to foreign-accented speech on Day 1, and testing them on comprehension of the accent one day later. Comprehension was thus not tested immediately, but only after a 24 hour period. On Day 1, native Dutch listeners listened to the speech of a Hebrew learner of Dutch while performing a phoneme monitoring task that did not depend on the talker’s accent. In particular, shortening of the long vowel /i/ into /ɪ/ (e.g., lief [li:f], ‘sweet’, pronounced as [lɪf]) was examined. These mispronunciations did not create lexical ambiguities in Dutch. On Day 2, listeners participated in a cross-modal priming task to test their comprehension of the accent. The results will be contrasted with results from an experiment without delayed testing and related to accounts of how listeners maintain adaptation to foreign-accented speech.