Publications

Abstract

The information we obtain from how speakers sound—for example their accent—affects how we interpret the messages they convey. A clear example is foreign accented speech, where reduced intelligibility and speaker's social categorization (out-group member) affect memory and the credibility of the message (e.g., less trustworthiness). In the present study, we go one step further and ask whether evaluations of messages are also affected by regional accents—accents from a different region than the listener. In the current study, we report results from three experiments on immediate memory recognition and immediate credibility assessments as well as the illusory truth effect. These revealed no differences between messages conveyed in local—from the same region as the participant—and regional accents—from native speakers of a different country than the participants. Our results suggest that when the accent of a speaker has high intelligibility, social categorization by accent does not seem to negatively affect how we treat the speakers' messages.

Abstract

The information we obtain from how speakers sound—for example their accent—affects how we interpret the
messages they convey. A clear example is foreign accented speech, where reduced intelligibility and speaker's
social categorization (out-group member) affect memory and the credibility of the message (e.g., less trust-
worthiness). In the present study, we go one step further and ask whether evaluations of messages are also
affected by regional accents—accents from a different region than the listener. In the current study, we report
results from three experiments on immediate memory recognition and immediate credibility assessments as well
as the illusory truth effect. These revealed no differences between messages conveyed in local—from the same
region as the participant—and regional accents—from native speakers of a different country than the partici-
pants. Our results suggest that when the accent of a speaker has high intelligibility, social categorization by
accent does not seem to negatively affect how we treat the speakers' messages.

Abstract

Manatees live in shallow, frequently turbid
waters. The sensory means by which they navigate in these
conditions are unknown. Poor visual acuity, lack of echo-
location, and modest chemosensation suggest that other
modalities play an important role. Rich innervation of sen-
sory hairs that cover the entire body and enlarged soma-
tosensory areas of the brain suggest that tactile senses are
good candidates. Previous tests of detection of underwater
vibratory stimuli indicated that they use passive movement
of the hairs to detect particle displacements in the vicinity
of a micron or less for frequencies from 10 to 150 Hz. In
the current study, hydrodynamic stimuli were created by
a sinusoidally oscillating sphere that generated a dipole
field at frequencies from 5 to 150 Hz. Go/no-go tests of
manatee postcranial mechanoreception of hydrodynamic
stimuli indicated excellent sensitivity but about an order of
magnitude less than the facial region. When the vibrissae
were trimmed, detection thresholds were elevated, suggest-
ing that the vibrissae were an important means by which
detection occurred. Manatees were also highly accurate in two-choice directional discrimination: greater than 90%
correct at all frequencies tested. We hypothesize that mana-
tees utilize vibrissae as a three-dimensional array to detect
and localize low-frequency hydrodynamic stimuli

Abstract

he current study examined the interaction of fearful, angry,
happy, and neutral expressions with left, straight, and
right eye gaze directions. Human participants viewed
faces consisting of various expression and eye gaze
combinations while event-related potential (ERP) data
were collected. The results showed that angry expressions
modulated the mean amplitude of the P1, whereas fearful
and happy expressions modulated the mean amplitude of
the N170. No influence of eye gaze on mean amplitudes for
the P1 and N170 emerged. Fearful, angry, and happy
expressions began to interact with eye gaze to influence
mean amplitudes in the time window of 200–400 ms.
The results suggest early processing of expression
influence ERPs independent of eye gaze, whereas
expression and gaze interact to influence later
ERPs.