Robust Lexically Mediated Compensation for Coarticulation: Christmash Time Is Here Again.
Cognitive penetrability
Computational model
Feedback
Language
Speech perception
Top-down effects
Journal
Cognitive science
ISSN: 1551-6709
Titre abrégé: Cogn Sci
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 7708195
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
04 2021
04 2021
Historique:
revised:
10
02
2021
received:
08
10
2020
accepted:
19
02
2021
entrez:
20
4
2021
pubmed:
21
4
2021
medline:
18
9
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
A long-standing question in cognitive science is how high-level knowledge is integrated with sensory input. For example, listeners can leverage lexical knowledge to interpret an ambiguous speech sound, but do such effects reflect direct top-down influences on perception or merely postperceptual biases? A critical test case in the domain of spoken word recognition is lexically mediated compensation for coarticulation (LCfC). Previous LCfC studies have shown that a lexically restored context phoneme (e.g., /s/ in Christma#) can alter the perceived place of articulation of a subsequent target phoneme (e.g., the initial phoneme of a stimulus from a tapes-capes continuum), consistent with the influence of an unambiguous context phoneme in the same position. Because this phoneme-to-phoneme compensation for coarticulation is considered sublexical, scientists agree that evidence for LCfC would constitute strong support for top-down interaction. However, results from previous LCfC studies have been inconsistent, and positive effects have often been small. Here, we conducted extensive piloting of stimuli prior to testing for LCfC. Specifically, we ensured that context items elicited robust phoneme restoration (e.g., that the final phoneme of Christma# was reliably identified as /s/) and that unambiguous context-final segments (e.g., a clear /s/ at the end of Christmas) drove reliable compensation for coarticulation for a subsequent target phoneme. We observed robust LCfC in a well-powered, preregistered experiment with these pretested items (N = 40) as well as in a direct replication study (N = 40). These results provide strong evidence in favor of computational models of spoken word recognition that include top-down feedback.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33877697
doi: 10.1111/cogs.12962
pmc: PMC8243960
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Research Support, U.S. Gov't, Non-P.H.S.
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e12962Subventions
Organisme : NIDCD NIH HHS
ID : T32 DC017703
Pays : United States
Informations de copyright
© 2021 The Authors. Cognitive Science published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of Cognitive Science Society (CSS).
Références
J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 1980 Feb;6(1):110-25
pubmed: 6444985
J Acoust Soc Am. 1981 Apr;69(4):1154-63
pubmed: 7229203
J Mem Lang. 2013 Apr;68(3):
pubmed: 24403724
Psychol Rev. 2008 Apr;115(2):357-95
pubmed: 18426294
Behav Res Methods. 2020 Feb;52(1):388-407
pubmed: 31016684
Psychol Sci. 2014 Jan;25(1):38-46
pubmed: 24297777
Cogn Psychol. 1997 Mar;32(2):97-127
pubmed: 9095679
Behav Res Methods. 2009 Nov;41(4):977-90
pubmed: 19897807
J Cogn Neurosci. 2020 Oct;32(10):2001-2012
pubmed: 32662731
Nat Commun. 2016 Dec 20;7:13619
pubmed: 27996973
Behav Brain Sci. 2000 Jun;23(3):299-325; discussion 325-70
pubmed: 11301575
Psychol Aging. 2014 Mar;29(1):150-62
pubmed: 24660803
Front Psychol. 2018 Aug 30;9:1568
pubmed: 30233453
Behav Brain Sci. 2016 Jan;39:e229
pubmed: 26189677
Front Psychol. 2018 Apr 03;9:369
pubmed: 29666593
Psychol Sci. 2019 Jun;30(6):830-841
pubmed: 31018103
Cogn Psychol. 2003 Sep;47(2):204-38
pubmed: 12948518
Perspect Psychol Sci. 2017 Mar;12(2):325-340
pubmed: 28346118
Perspect Psychol Sci. 2017 Mar;12(2):347-349
pubmed: 28346116
Cogn Psychol. 1986 Jan;18(1):1-86
pubmed: 3753912
Int J Audiol. 2008 Nov;47 Suppl 2:S72-82
pubmed: 19012114
Nat Rev Neurosci. 2010 Feb;11(2):127-38
pubmed: 20068583
Neuroimage. 2013 Oct 1;79:201-12
pubmed: 23648960
Psychol Aging. 2012 Mar;27(1):33-45
pubmed: 22149253
Lang Cogn Neurosci. 2016 Jan 2;31(1):4-18
pubmed: 26740960
Cogn Sci. 2014 Aug;38(6):1139-89
pubmed: 25098813
Front Psychol. 2014 Jul 01;5:674
pubmed: 25071647
Psychol Sci. 2001 Jul;12(4):348-51
pubmed: 11476105
Atten Percept Psychophys. 2017 Oct;79(7):2064-2072
pubmed: 28695541
Curr Biol. 2013 Aug 19;23(16):1585-9
pubmed: 23891107
Conscious Cogn. 2017 Jan;47:63-74
pubmed: 27222169
J Cogn Neurosci. 2011 Dec;23(12):3914-32
pubmed: 21745006
Front Psychol. 2013 Jan 21;3:620
pubmed: 23346068
Front Psychol. 2013 Aug 20;4:503
pubmed: 23970868
J Acoust Soc Am. 1982 Jun;71(6):1562-7
pubmed: 7108031
Perception. 2009;38(12):1782-95
pubmed: 20192128
Behav Brain Sci. 2013 Jun;36(3):181-204
pubmed: 23663408
J Acoust Soc Am. 1981 Feb;69(2):548-58
pubmed: 7462477
Cognition. 2020 Apr;197:104162
pubmed: 31901875
Science. 1970 Jan 23;167(3917):392-3
pubmed: 5409744
Nat Rev Neurosci. 2013 May;14(5):350-63
pubmed: 23595013
Trends Cogn Sci. 2020 Nov;24(11):930-944
pubmed: 33012687