Quantitative evaluation of lexical status, word frequency, and neighborhood density as context effects in spoken word recognition

2003 ◽  
Vol 113 (3) ◽  
pp. 1689-1705 ◽  
Author(s):  
José R. Benkı́
Keyword(s):  
Word Recognition ◽  
Word Frequency ◽  
Quantitative Evaluation ◽  
Context Effects ◽  
Spoken Word Recognition ◽  
Spoken Word ◽  
Neighborhood Density ◽  
Lexical Status

Lexical neighborhoods and phonological confusability in cross-dialect word recognition in noise

2010 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Cynthia G. Clopper ◽  
Janet B. Pierrehumbert ◽  
Terrin N. Tamati
Keyword(s):  
Word Recognition ◽  
Target Word ◽  
Recognition Performance ◽  
Spoken Word Recognition ◽  
Spoken Word ◽  
Neighborhood Density ◽  
Minimal Pair ◽  
Dialect Variation ◽  
Vowel Recognition ◽  
Stimulus Materials

AbstractLexical neighborhood density is a well-known factor affecting phonological categorization in spoken word recognition. The current study examined the interaction between lexical neighborhood density and dialect variation in spoken word recognition in noise. The stimulus materials were real English words produced in two regional American English dialects. To manipulate lexical neighborhood density, target words were selected so that predicted phonological confusions across dialects resulted in real English words in the word-competitor condition and did not result in real English words in the nonword-competitor condition. Word and vowel recognition performance were more accurate in the nonword-competitor condition than the word-competitor condition for both talker dialects. An examination of the responses to specific vowels revealed the role of dialect variation in eliciting this effect. When the predicted phonological confusions were real lexical neighbors, listeners could respond with either the target word or the confusable minimal pair, and were more likely than expected to produce a minimal pair differing from the target by one vowel. When the predicted phonological confusions were not real words, however, the listeners exhibited less lexical competition and responded with the target word or a minimal pair differing by one consonant.

scholarly journals Effects of Age, Word Frequency, and Noise on the Time Course of Spoken Word Recognition

2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Kristin J. Van Engen ◽  
Avanti Dey ◽  
Nichole Runge ◽  
Brent Spehar ◽  
Mitchell S. Sommers ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Older Adults ◽  
Young Adults ◽  
Word Recognition ◽  
Target Word ◽  
Word Frequency ◽  
Time Course ◽  
Spoken Word Recognition ◽  
Low Frequency ◽  
Spoken Word ◽  
Lexical Activation

This study assessed the effects of age, word frequency, and background noise on the time course of lexical activation during spoken word recognition. Participants (41 young adults and 39 older adults) performed a visual world word recognition task while we monitored their gaze position. On each trial, four phonologically unrelated pictures appeared on the screen. A target word was presented auditorily following a carrier phrase (“Click on ________”), at which point participants were instructed to use the mouse to click on the picture that corresponded to the target word. High- and low-frequency words were presented in quiet to half of the participants. The other half heard the words in a low level of noise in which the words were still readily identifiable. Results showed that, even in the absence of phonological competitors in the visual array, high-frequency words were fixated more quickly than low-frequency words by both listener groups. Young adults were generally faster to fixate on targets compared to older adults, but the pattern of interactions among noise, word frequency, and listener age showed that older adults’ lexical activation largely matches that of young adults in a modest amount of noise.

scholarly journals Effects of word frequency, contextual diversity, and semantic distinctiveness on spoken word recognition

2012 ◽  
Vol 132 (2) ◽  
pp. EL74-EL80 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brendan T. Johns ◽  
Thomas M. Gruenenfelder ◽  
David B. Pisoni ◽  
Michael N. Jones
Keyword(s):  
Word Recognition ◽  
Word Frequency ◽  
Spoken Word Recognition ◽  
Spoken Word ◽  
Contextual Diversity

scholarly journals Context Effects and Spoken Word Recognition of Chinese: An Eye-Tracking Study

2017 ◽  
Vol 42 ◽  
pp. 1134-1153 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael C. W. Yip ◽  
Mingjun Zhai
Keyword(s):  
Word Recognition ◽  
Eye Tracking ◽  
Context Effects ◽  
Spoken Word Recognition ◽  
Spoken Word

Auditory perception and word recognition in Cantonese-Chinese speaking children with and without Specific Language Impairment

2015 ◽  
Vol 44 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-35
Author(s):  
JOANNA C. KIDD ◽  
KATHY K. SHUM ◽  
ANITA M.-Y. WONG ◽  
CONNIE S.-H. HO ◽  
TERRY K. AU
Keyword(s):  
Word Recognition ◽  
Language Impairment ◽  
Phonological Processing ◽  
Oral Language ◽  
Specific Language Impairment ◽  
Auditory Perception ◽  
Spoken Word Recognition ◽  
Spoken Word ◽  
Neighborhood Density ◽  
Specific Language

AbstractAuditory processing and spoken word recognition difficulties have been observed in Specific Language Impairment (SLI), raising the possibility that auditory perceptual deficits disrupt word recognition and, in turn, phonological processing and oral language. In this study, fifty-seven kindergarten children with SLI and fifty-three language-typical age-matched controls were assessed with a speech-gating task to measure spoken word recognition, psychophysical tasks to measure auditory Frequency Modulation (FM) detection and Frequency Discrimination (FD), and standardized psychometric tests of phonological processing and oral language. As a group, children with SLI took significantly longer than language-typical controls to recognize words with high neighborhood density, perhaps reflecting subpar phonological representations. FM, but not FD, was significantly worse in SLI. However, while both poorer speech-gating performance and poorer auditory thresholds (FM) were evident in SLI, spoken word recognition did not mediate any relation between auditory perception and either phonological processing or oral language.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document