↓ Skip to main content

Linking Speech Perception and Neurophysiology: Speech Decoding Guided by Cascaded Oscillators Locked to the Input Rhythm

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, January 2011
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (94th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (81st percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
297 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
309 Mendeley
citeulike
2 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Linking Speech Perception and Neurophysiology: Speech Decoding Guided by Cascaded Oscillators Locked to the Input Rhythm
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, January 2011
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00130
Pubmed ID
Authors

Oded Ghitza

Abstract

The premise of this study is that current models of speech perception, which are driven by acoustic features alone, are incomplete, and that the role of decoding time during memory access must be incorporated to account for the patterns of observed recognition phenomena. It is postulated that decoding time is governed by a cascade of neuronal oscillators, which guide template-matching operations at a hierarchy of temporal scales. Cascaded cortical oscillations in the theta, beta, and gamma frequency bands are argued to be crucial for speech intelligibility. Intelligibility is high so long as these oscillations remain phase locked to the auditory input rhythm. A model (Tempo) is presented which is capable of emulating recent psychophysical data on the intelligibility of speech sentences as a function of "packaging" rate (Ghitza and Greenberg, 2009). The data show that intelligibility of speech that is time-compressed by a factor of 3 (i.e., a high syllabic rate) is poor (above 50% word error rate), but is substantially restored when the information stream is re-packaged by the insertion of silent gaps in between successive compressed-signal intervals - a counterintuitive finding, difficult to explain using classical models of speech perception, but emerging naturally from the Tempo architecture.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 309 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 10 3%
Germany 3 <1%
United Kingdom 3 <1%
Denmark 2 <1%
Norway 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Finland 1 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Belgium 1 <1%
Other 3 <1%
Unknown 283 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 89 29%
Researcher 59 19%
Student > Master 54 17%
Student > Doctoral Student 18 6%
Professor 15 5%
Other 36 12%
Unknown 38 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 70 23%
Psychology 64 21%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 31 10%
Linguistics 28 9%
Engineering 20 6%
Other 42 14%
Unknown 54 17%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 19. 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 27 August 2023.
All research outputs
#1,846,676
of 24,336,902 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#3,741
of 32,766 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#10,156
of 188,400 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#45
of 239 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,336,902 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 32,766 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% 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 188,400 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 239 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.