No abstract

Is it possible that silent reading rate is the same as the most efficient listening rate? The hypothesis has been formulated in the past, but never got much traction because silent reading is almost twice as fast as typical speech. On the other hand, several studies have shown that listening comprehension retains high quality for spoken materials presented at speeds up to 275 words per minute (wpm), and a recent meta-analysis has also shown that reading rate is lower than often thought: 240-260 wpm on average. To address the question above, we ran a new study specifically comparing spontaneous silent reading rate with comprehension of speech presented at different rates within the same participants and using matched texts. We replicated the finding that listening comprehension was not hindered at the speech rate of 270 wpm but showed a steep decline at the rate of 315 wpm. Thus, the most efficient observed listening rate was on par with the spontaneous reading rate for the same texts (269 wpm on average). Therefore, we conclude that listening and reading follow the same time constraints. Public Significance StatementOne of the central and hotly debated questions in psychology of language is whether reading, listening, and speaking are served by fundamentally different or highly similar cognitive processes. An important piece of evidence for this debate is the speed at which production and comprehension of language takes place. This study is the first to show in the same group of participants that the timecompressed speech rate at which listening comprehension can be successful is on par with or exceeds the reading rate. This suggests that speed of comprehension is independent of modality (auditory or visual) and likely relies on highly similar cognitive processes.

In this study, we examined speaker-dependent (acoustic) and speaker-independent (lexical) linguistic influences on perceived foreign accentedness. Accentedness ratings assigned to Chinese-accented English words were analyzed, taking accentedness as a continuum. The speakerdependent variables were included as acoustic distances, measured in relation to typical native-speaker values. The speakerindependent variable measures were related to the properties of individual words, not influenced by the speech signal. To the best of the authors' knowledge, this represents the first attempt to examine speaker-dependent and speakerindependent variables simultaneously. The model indicated that the perception of accentedness is affected by both acoustic goodness of fit and lexical properties. The results are discussed in terms of matching variability in the input to multidimensional representations.

No abstract