Search

Purpose: We present a tripartite view of intelligibility in which the contributions of both the speaker and listener, as well as their joint effort during interaction, are considered. While considerable research has examined communicative interactions in situ, there is a critical gap in current knowledge on how speech intelligibility unfolds during such interactions. Here, we argue that research examining speech intelligibility in communicative interactions may provide important groundwork for advancement in clinical interventions for individuals with dysarthria. Method: First, we describe the view and argue for its consideration as a powerful way of thinking about speech intelligibility. We then briefly situate the view in the relevant literature on speech intelligibility and existing theoretical frameworks. We then identify suitable methodological paradigms for studying joint contributions to intelligibility and, lastly, discuss the clinical application and potential impact of this tripartite view. Conclusions: Speech communication occurs through interaction; however, in the laboratory and clinic, emphasis is usually placed on individual speakers and listeners. We have proposed that it is critical to consider how the joint contributions of speakers and listeners affect speech intelligibility in communicative interaction. This conceptualization is well aligned with the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health, and the findings from such an approach will allow us to better understand how to maximize available resources to enhance speech intelligibility.

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether listeners with normal hearing perceiving noise-vocoded speech-in-speech demonstrate better intelligibility of target speech when the background speech was mismatched in language (linguistic release from masking [LRM]) and/or location (spatial release from masking [SRM]) relative to the target. We also assessed whether the spectral resolution of the noise-vocoded stimuli affected the presence of LRM and SRM under these conditions. Method: In Experiment 1, a mixed factorial design was used to simultaneously manipulate the masker language (within-subject, English vs. Dutch), the simulated masker location (within-subject, right, center, left), and the spectral resolution (between-subjects, 6 vs. 12 channels) of noise-vocoded target-masker combinations presented at +25 dB signal-to-noise ratio (SNR). In Experiment 2, the study was repeated using a spectral resolution of 12 channels at +15 dB SNR. Results: In both experiments, listeners' intelligibility of noise-vocoded targets was better when the background masker was Dutch, demonstrating reliable LRM in all conditions. The pattern of results in Experiment 1 was not reliably different across the 6- and 12-channel noise-vocoded speech. Finally, a reliable spatial benefit (SRM) was detected only in the more challenging SNR condition (Experiment 2). Conclusion: The current study is the first to report a clear LRM benefit in noise-vocoded speech-in-speech recognition. Our results indicate that this benefit is available even under spectrally degraded conditions and that it may augment the benefit due to spatial separation of target speech and competing backgrounds.

Accounts of speech perception disagree on how listeners demonstrate perceptual constancy despite considerable variation in the speech signal due to speakers' coarticulation. According to the spectral contrast account, listeners' compensation for coarticulation (CfC) results from listeners perceiving the target-segment frequencies differently depending on the contrastive effects exerted by the preceding sound's frequencies. In this study, we reexamine a notable finding that listeners apparently demonstrate perceptual adjustments to coarticulation even when the identity of the speaker (i.e., the "source") changes midway between speech segments. We evaluated these apparent across-talker CfC effects on the rationale that such adjustments to coarticulation would likely be maladaptive for perceiving speech in multi-talker settings. In addition, we evaluated whether such cross-talker adaptations, if detected, were modulated by prior experience. We did so by manipulating the exposure phase of three groups of listeners by (a) merely exposing them to our stimuli (b) explicitly alerting them to talker change or (c) implicitly alerting them to this change. All groups then completed identical test blocks in which we assessed their CfC patterns in within- and across-talker conditions. Our results uniformly demonstrated that, while all three groups showed robust CfC shifts in the within-talker conditions, no such shifts were detected in the across-talker condition. Our results call into question a speaker-neutral explanation for CfC. Broadly, this demonstrates the need to carefully examine the perceptual demands placed on listeners in constrained experimental tasks and to evaluate whether the accounts that derive from such settings scale up to the demands of real-world listening. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: We examined which measures of complexity are most informative when studying language produced in interaction. Specifically, using these measures, we explored whether native and nonnative speakers modified the higher level properties of their production beyond the acoustic–phonetic level based on the language background of their conversation partner. Method: Using a subset of production data from the Wildcat Corpus that used Diapix, an interactive picture matching task, to elicit production, we compared English language production at the dyad and individual level across three different pair types: eight native pairs (English–English), eight mixed pairs (four English–Chinese and four English–Korean), and eight nonnative pairs (four Chinese–Chinese and four Korean–Korean). Results: At both the dyad and individual levels, native speakers produced longer and more clausally dense speech. They also produced fewer silent pauses and fewer linguistic mazes relative to nonnative speakers. Speakers did not modify their production based on the language background of their interlocutor. Conclusions: The current study examines higher level properties of language production in true interaction. Our results suggest that speakers’ productions were determined by their own language background and were independent of that of their interlocutor. Furthermore, these demonstrated promise for capturing syntactic characteristics of language produced in true dialogue. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

According to one approach to speech perception, listeners perceive speech by applying general pattern matching mechanisms to the acoustic signal (e.g., Diehl, Lotto, & Holt, 2004). An alternative is that listeners perceive the phonetic gestures that structured the acoustic signal (e.g., Fowler, 1986). The two accounts have offered different explanations for the phenomenon of "compensation for coarticulation" (CfC). An example of CfC is that if a speaker produces a gesture with a front place of articulation, it may be pulled slightly backwards if it follows a back place of articulation, and listeners' category boundaries shift (compensate) accordingly. The gestural account appeals to direct attunement to coarticulation to explain CfC, whereas the auditory account explains it by spectral contrast. In previous studies, spectral contrast and gestural consequences of coarticulation have been correlated, such that both accounts made identical predictions. We identify a liquid context in Tamil that disentangles contrast and coarticulation, such that the two accounts make different predictions. In a standard CfC task in Experiment 1, gestural coarticulation rather than spectral contrast determined the direction of CfC. Experiments 2, 3, and 4 demonstrated that tone analogues of the speech precursors failed to produce the same effects observed in Experiment 1, suggesting that simple spectral contrast cannot account for the findings of Experiment 1. (Contains 1 table, 6 figures and 5 footnotes.)

Among other characteristics, voiced and voiceless consonants differ in voice onset time (VOT; Lisker & Abramson, 1964). In addition, in English, voiced consonants are typically followed by longer vowels than their unvoiced counterparts (Allen & Miller, 1999). In Spanish, this relationship is less systematic (Zimmerman & Sapon, 1958). In two experiments, we investigated perceptual sensitivities of English and Spanish native speakers to following vowel length (VL) in categorizing syllables that ranged from a prevoiced bilabial stop [ba] to a long-lag bilabial stop [pa]. According to our results, English speakers show sensitivity to following vowels with VLs falling within an English-typical range (Experiment 1), but not when vowels are shorter and in a Spanish-typical range (Experiment 2). Interestingly, Spanish native speakers do not show sensitivity to following VL in either condition. These results suggest that VOT-VL tradeoffs in perception reflect phonological sensitivities of listeners and are not reducible to speech rate compensation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Recent work in embodied cognition has demonstrated that language comprehension involves the motor system (e.g., Glenberg & Kaschak, 2002). Such findings are often attributed to mechanisms involving simulations of linguistically described events (Barsalou, 1999; Fischer & Zwaan, 2008). We propose that research paradigms in which simulation is the central focus need to be augmented with paradigms that probe the organization of the motor system during language comprehension. The use of well-studied motor tasks may be appropriate to this endeavour. To this end, we present a study in which participants perform a bimanual rhythmic task (Kugler & Turvey, 1987) while judging the plausibility of sentences. We show that the dynamics of the bimanual task differ when participants judge sentences describing performable actions as opposed to sentences describing events that are not performable. We discuss the general implications of our results for accounts of embodied cognition.