Processing Speaker Variability in Repetition and Semantic/associative Priming

Overview

Journal J Psycholinguist Res

Publisher Springer

Specialty Psychology

Date 2014 Jul 4

PMID 24989850

Citations 4

Authors

Chao-Yang Lee

Yu Zhang

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

The effect of speaker variability on accessing the form and meaning of spoken words was evaluated in two short-term priming experiments. In the repetition priming experiment, participants listened to repeated or unrelated prime-target pairs, in which the prime and target were produced by the same speaker or different speakers. The results showed robust repetition priming, but only partial evidence of reduction of priming by speaker variability. In the semantic/associative priming experiment, participants listened to semantically/associatively related or unrelated prime-target pairs, in which the prime and target were produced by the same speaker or different speakers. The results showed robust semantic/associative priming, but the reduction of priming by speaker variability took place only for targets produced by the female speaker. There is no evidence that the speaker variability effect varied as a function of inter-stimulus interval. These findings suggest that speaker variability could affect access to word form and meaning, but the impact is relatively weak.

Citing Articles

Opposing serial effects of stimulus and choice in speech perception scale with context variability.

Ufer C, Blank H iScience. 2024; 27(9):110611.

PMID: 39252961 PMC: 11382034. DOI: 10.1016/j.isci.2024.110611.

Towards a simultaneously speaking bilingual robot: Primary study on the effect of gender and pitch of the robot's voice.

Pourfannan H, Mahzoon H, Yoshikawa Y, Ishiguro H PLoS One. 2022; 17(12):e0278852.

PMID: 36576933 PMC: 9797082. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0278852.

Speaker information affects false recognition of unstudied lexical-semantic associates.

Luthra S, Fox N, Blumstein S Atten Percept Psychophys. 2018; 80(4):894-912.

PMID: 29473144 PMC: 6003774. DOI: 10.3758/s13414-018-1485-z.

Processing Lexical and Speaker Information in Repetition and Semantic/Associative Priming.

Lee C, Zhang Y J Psycholinguist Res. 2017; 47(1):65-78.

PMID: 28752195 DOI: 10.1007/s10936-017-9514-y.

References

STUDEBAKER G . A "rationalized" arcsine transform. J Speech Hear Res. 1985; 28(3):455-62. DOI: 10.1044/jshr.2803.455. View

Andruski J, Blumstein S, Burton M . The effect of subphonetic differences on lexical access. Cognition. 1994; 52(3):163-87. DOI: 10.1016/0010-0277(94)90042-6. View

Mattys S, Liss J . On building models of spoken-word recognition: when there is as much to learn from natural "oddities" as artificial normality. Percept Psychophys. 2008; 70(7):1235-42. DOI: 10.3758/PP.70.7.1235. View

Wilson R, CARHART R . Forward and backward masking: interactions and additivity. J Acoust Soc Am. 1971; 49(4):Suppl 2:1254+. DOI: 10.1121/1.1912488. View

Jackson A, Morton J . Facilitation of auditory word recognition. Mem Cognit. 1984; 12(6):568-74. DOI: 10.3758/bf03213345. View

Massaro D . Preperceptual auditory images. J Exp Psychol. 1970; 85(3):411-7. DOI: 10.1037/h0029712. View

Goldinger S . Words and voices: episodic traces in spoken word identification and recognition memory. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 1996; 22(5):1166-83. DOI: 10.1037//0278-7393.22.5.1166. View

Vitevitch M, Donoso A . Processing of indexical information requires time: Evidence from change deafness. Q J Exp Psychol (Hove). 2011; 64(8):1484-93. PMC: 3150600. DOI: 10.1080/17470218.2011.578749. View

Luce P, LYONS E . Specificity of memory representations for spoken words. Mem Cognit. 1998; 26(4):708-15. DOI: 10.3758/bf03211391. View

10.

Schacter D, Church B . Auditory priming: implicit and explicit memory for words and voices. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 1992; 18(5):915-30. DOI: 10.1037//0278-7393.18.5.915. View

11.

McLennan C, Luce P . Examining the time course of indexical specificity effects in spoken word recognition. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2005; 31(2):306-21. DOI: 10.1037/0278-7393.31.2.306. View

12.

Nygaard L, Sommers M, Pisoni D . SPEECH PERCEPTION AS A TALKER-CONTINGENT PROCESS. Psychol Sci. 2011; 5(1):42-46. PMC: 3081685. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.1994.tb00612.x. View

13.

McLennan C, Luce P, Charles-Luce J . Representation of lexical form. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2003; 29(4):539-53. DOI: 10.1037/0278-7393.29.4.539. View

14.

Meyer D, Schvaneveldt R . Meaning, memory structure, and mental processes. Science. 1976; 192(4234):27-33. DOI: 10.1126/science.1257753. View

15.

Palmeri T, Goldinger S, Pisoni D . Episodic encoding of voice attributes and recognition memory for spoken words. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 1993; 19(2):309-28. PMC: 3499966. DOI: 10.1037//0278-7393.19.2.309. View

16.

Kittredge A, Davis L, Blumstein S . Effects of nonlinguistic auditory variations on lexical processing in Broca's aphasics. Brain Lang. 2005; 97(1):25-40. DOI: 10.1016/j.bandl.2005.07.012. View

17.

Church B, Schacter D . Perceptual specificity of auditory priming: implicit memory for voice intonation and fundamental frequency. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 1994; 20(3):521-33. DOI: 10.1037//0278-7393.20.3.521. View

18.

Creel S, Aslin R, Tanenhaus M . Heeding the voice of experience: the role of talker variation in lexical access. Cognition. 2007; 106(2):633-64. DOI: 10.1016/j.cognition.2007.03.013. View