Distinctive Phonetic Features as Relevant and Irrelevant Stimulus Dimensions in Speech-Sound Discrimination Learning

1974 ◽  
Vol 17 (3) ◽  
pp. 417-425
Author(s):  
Stuart I. Ritterman ◽  
Nancy C. Freeman
Keyword(s):  
College Students ◽  
Discrimination Learning ◽  
Irrelevant Dimension ◽  
Speech Sound ◽  
Irrelevant Stimulus ◽  
Relevant Dimension ◽  
Phonetic Features ◽  
Sound Discrimination ◽  
Nonsense Syllables

Thirty-two college students were required to learn the relevant dimension in each of two randomized lists of auditorily presented stimuli. The stimuli consisted of seven pairs of CV nonsense syllables differing by two relevant dimension units and from zero to seven irrelevant dimension units. Stimulus dimensions were determined according to Saporta’s units of difference. No significant differences in performance as a function of number of the irrelevant dimensions nor characteristics of the relevant dimension were observed.

“Same” and “Different” Concepts and Children’s Performance on Speech Sound Discrimination

1973 ◽  
Vol 16 (3) ◽  
pp. 513-517 ◽  
Author(s):  
Barbara Beving ◽  
Roy E. Eblen
Keyword(s):  
Speech Sound ◽  
The Other ◽  
Older Children ◽  
Sound Discrimination ◽  
Nonsense Syllables

Thirty children four to eight years of age were tested with two speech-sound discrimination tasks. In one, they were asked to identify a pair of nonsense syllables as “same” or “different,” and in the other they were asked to repeat the syllable pair. The youngest children (mean age four years, seven months) scored better on the imitation task than on the “same-different” task, while the other groups (mean ages six years, seven months and eight years, six months) did not differ in their ability to perform either task. The youngest group differed from the two older groups in their score on the same-different task but not on the imitation task. Thus, the preschoolage subjects were thought to be unable to make the cognitive judgment “same” or “different,” although they were able to discriminate as well as the older children.

Speech-Sound Discrimination Skills as Measured by Reaction Time for Normal and Articulatory Defective Speaking Children

1972 ◽  
Vol 34 (2) ◽  
pp. 595-600 ◽  
Author(s):  
Frederick F. Weiner ◽  
Mervyn L. Falk
Keyword(s):  
Reaction Time ◽  
Speech Sound ◽  
Auditory Discrimination ◽  
Speech Sounds ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Sound Discrimination ◽  
Normal Speaking ◽  
Nonsense Syllables

Reaction time measures were obtained from 30 normal speaking children and 30 articulatory defective children on a task which required determining similarities or differences between speech sounds presented in nonsense syllables. The results showed that there was no significant difference between these groups in the time needed to make the discriminations. These results are in opposition to the findings of various authors who have concluded that children with articulation deficits also demonstrate some type of auditory discrimination deficit.

Another Approach to Evaluating Speech Sound Discrimination

1969 ◽  
Vol 35 (9) ◽  
pp. 745-747 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ronald Goldman ◽  
Macalyne Fristoe
Keyword(s):  
Speech Sound ◽  
Sound Discrimination

scholarly journals Devising a development test of auditory perception: Problems and prospects

1971 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Arnold Abramovitz
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Emotionally Disturbed ◽  
Auditory Perception ◽  
Speech Sound ◽  
Pattern Discrimination ◽  
Auditory Training ◽  
Environmental Sounds ◽  
Threshold Phenomena ◽  
Sound Discrimination ◽  
Hearing Children

It is certain that many children whose auditory perception is queried by audiologists, speech therapists, educationists and psychologists elude the diagnostic screens presently available in each of these disciplines. The need for a qualitative and quantitative psychological assessment of the child's auditory abilities and disabilities led to the development of a test which was intended to evaluate the following functions:(a) Recognition of environmental sounds, (b) Auditory figure-ground discrimination, (c) Speech-sound discrimination (phonemic and intonational) and (d) Tonal pattern discrimination (pitch, loudness, duration and interval). It was not intended to investigate threshold phenomena as such but rather to supplement and complement pure-tone and speech audiometry. The test was applied to 205 children, aged five to ten years, drawn from a normal school population, and 232 children with difficulties and handicaps varying both in degree and kind. Only the first two sub-tests were found to be clinically and experimentally viable, and data for the curtailed test are presented. The following results are noteworthy: (1) The test measures functions which are positively related to both age and intelligence. (2) Brain-injured, retarded and emotionally disturbed children generally test low on auditory figure-ground discrimination; this vulnerability is most likely due to perseveration. (3) Previously unsuspected peripheral hearing losses may sometimes be detected by the use of the test. On the other hand, some children said to have high degrees of hearing loss test at or above their age-level. (4) Many deaf and hard-of-hearing children test higher without their hearing-aids; this is probably due to amplification being achieved at the cost of distortion. (5) Children of average intelligence with reading and/or spelling difficulties often test low on auditory figure-ground discrimination. (6) Blind children who have received auditory training are equal to sighted children in recognition of environmental sounds, but superior in auditory figure-ground discrimination. This does not, however, necessarily signify superior auditory perception as such on the part of the blind. In general it is concluded that the development of tests of auditory perception could add significantly to the psycho-educational assessment of both "normal" and handicapped children.

scholarly journals Interlanguage Errors Based on the Source of Errors in Indonesian College Students’ Pronunciation

2020 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 34-42
Author(s):  
Arian Pramesta Harunika ◽  
Zulfa Sakhiyya ◽  
Rudi Hartono
Keyword(s):  
College Students ◽  
Qualitative Method ◽  
Female Students ◽  
Male Students ◽  
Female College Students ◽  
Male And Female ◽  
L1 Transfer ◽  
Video Recorder ◽  
Phonetic Features ◽  
L1 And L2

This study aimed to explore the source of IL errors on male and female students’ pronunciation. The participants in this research were ten college students who were participated in an English speech contest organised by English Student Association of UNNES 2019. The ten participants consist of five male and five female students who came from different kinds of University in Indonesia. In this study, the researcher used a descriptive qualitative method to analyze the data by using a video recorder as an instrument to collect the data. The result of this research showed that there were four sources of errors which influenced male and female students in producing IL errors on pronunciation. Those were L1 transfer, different form of plural between L1 and L2, the existence of sounds with the same phonetic features but different in distribution, and English foreign sounds. The second result described that the source of errors on male and female college students was mostly similar, and they had no significant differences. Last result showed that male students made more variation of IL errors on their pronunciation than female students.

scholarly journals Anterior paracingulate and cingulate cortex mediates the effects of cognitive load on speech sound discrimination

NeuroImage ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 178 ◽  
pp. 735-743 ◽  
Author(s):  
Silvia P. Gennari ◽  
Rebecca E. Millman ◽  
Mark Hymers ◽  
Sven L. Mattys
Keyword(s):  
Cognitive Load ◽  
Speech Sound ◽  
Cingulate Cortex ◽  
Sound Discrimination

Influence of Environment on Speech-Sound Discrimination: Findings From a Longitudinal Study

2020 ◽  
pp. 541-558
Author(s):  
Dennis L. Molfese ◽  
Victoria J. Molfese ◽  
Alexandra Fonaryova Key ◽  
Spencer D. Kelly
Keyword(s):  
Longitudinal Study ◽  
Speech Sound ◽  
Sound Discrimination

The use of visual information in non-native speech sound discrimination across the first year of life

2015 ◽  
Vol 137 (4) ◽  
pp. 2432-2432 ◽  
Author(s):  
D. Kyle Danielson ◽  
Padmapriya A. Kandhadai ◽  
Janet F. Werker
Keyword(s):  
Visual Information ◽  
Speech Sound ◽  
First Year ◽  
Native Speech ◽  
Sound Discrimination ◽  
First Year Of Life
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document