Enhancing speech learning by combining task practice with periods of stimulus exposure without practice

Abstract

Language acquisition typically involves periods when the learner speaks and listens to the new language, and others when the learner is exposed to the language without consciously speaking or listening to it. Adaptation to variants of a native language occurs under similar conditions. Here, speech learning by adults was assessed following a training regimen that mimicked this common situation of language immersion without continuous active language processing. Experiment 1 focused on the acquisition of a novel phonetic category along the voice-onset-time continuum, while Experiment 2 focused on adaptation to foreign-accented speech. The critical training regimens of each experiment involved alternation between periods of practice with the task of phonetic classification (Experiment 1) or sentence recognition (Experiment 2) and periods of stimulus exposure without practice. These practice and exposure periods yielded little to no improvement separately, but alternation between them generated as much or more improvement as did practicing during every period. Practice appears to serve as a catalyst that enables stimulus exposures encountered both during and outside of the practice periods to contribute to quite distinct cases of speech learning. It follows that practice-plus-exposure combinations may tap a general learning mechanism that facilitates language acquisition and speech processing.

Inducing musical-interval learning by combining task practice with periods of stimulus exposure alone

“…In previous investigations, Practice+Exposure training promoted learning on fine-grained discrimination tasks—auditory frequency discrimination (B. A. Wright, Sabin, Zhang, Marrone, & Fitzgerald, 2010) and visual orientation discrimination (Szpiro, Wright, & Carrasco, 2014)—and on speech tasks—acquisition of a non-native phonetic contrast (Wright, Baese-Berk, Marrone, & Bradlow, 2015) and adaptation to a foreign accent (Wright et al, 2015). Therefore, we suspected that it might aid learning on musical-interval perception as well.…”

Brain-behavior relationships in incidental learning of non-native phonetic categories

“…It may be that this paradigm would be more effective in conjunction with training tasks where participants can explicitly practice on the tasks that will ultimately be used to assess learning. Indeed, in a recent study of non-native phonetic learning, Wright, Baese-Berk, Marrone & Bradlow (2015) found that alternating between periods of stimulus exposure and periods of explicit practice with posttest tasks yielded better learning than did explicit practice alone.…”

Adaptation to novel foreign-accented speech and retention of benefit following training: Influence of aging and hearing loss

“…Wright et al (2015) have recently suggested that a combination of paradigms with high and low engagement may be most effective. Training may focus on phonemelevel, word-level, or sentence-level contrasts, each of which may involve different cognitive processes and facilitate different types of learning.…”

“…As described earlier, training paradigms may vary in duration, stimulus characteristics, blocking of stimuli, and participant engagement. Wright et al (2015) examined a training paradigm that combines both active training and passive exposure-only conditions, and concluded that this hybrid paradigm is more beneficial than either type of training alone. These authors also suggested that effective training can occur only when a sufficient amount of daily practice is achieved, and that benefits of training may be greatest when such practice is maintained, stimulating sustained neural plasticity.…”