↓ Skip to main content

Varying acoustic-phonemic ambiguity reveals that talker normalization is obligatory in speech processing

Overview of attention for article published in Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, February 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
29 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
45 Mendeley
Title
Varying acoustic-phonemic ambiguity reveals that talker normalization is obligatory in speech processing
Published in
Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, February 2018
DOI 10.3758/s13414-017-1395-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ja Young Choi, Elly R. Hu, Tyler K. Perrachione

Abstract

The nondeterministic relationship between speech acoustics and abstract phonemic representations imposes a challenge for listeners to maintain perceptual constancy despite the highly variable acoustic realization of speech. Talker normalization facilitates speech processing by reducing the degrees of freedom for mapping between encountered speech and phonemic representations. While this process has been proposed to facilitate the perception of ambiguous speech sounds, it is currently unknown whether talker normalization is affected by the degree of potential ambiguity in acoustic-phonemic mapping. We explored the effects of talker normalization on speech processing in a series of speeded classification paradigms, parametrically manipulating the potential for inconsistent acoustic-phonemic relationships across talkers for both consonants and vowels. Listeners identified words with varying potential acoustic-phonemic ambiguity across talkers (e.g., beet/boat vs. boot/boat) spoken by single or mixed talkers. Auditory categorization of words was always slower when listening to mixed talkers compared to a single talker, even when there was no potential acoustic ambiguity between target sounds. Moreover, the processing cost imposed by mixed talkers was greatest when words had the most potential acoustic-phonemic overlap across talkers. Models of acoustic dissimilarity between target speech sounds did not account for the pattern of results. These results suggest (a) that talker normalization incurs the greatest processing cost when disambiguating highly confusable sounds and (b) that talker normalization appears to be an obligatory component of speech perception, taking place even when the acoustic-phonemic relationships across sounds are unambiguous.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 45 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 45 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 24%
Researcher 8 18%
Professor 3 7%
Student > Bachelor 2 4%
Other 2 4%
Other 7 16%
Unknown 12 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 12 27%
Linguistics 6 13%
Neuroscience 4 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 2%
Other 3 7%
Unknown 17 38%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 23 September 2021.
All research outputs
#15,115,997
of 24,003,070 outputs
Outputs from Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics
#696
of 1,773 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#245,845
of 444,171 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics
#8
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,003,070 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,773 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 444,171 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.