Precategorical acoustic storage for vowels of short and long duration

Crowder, Robert G.

doi:10.3758/bf03205809

Cited by 25 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Finally, and maybe more interestingly, the observation that the vowel similarity produced more interference (both intralist and interlist) than the consonant similarity is consistent with previous experimental findings with alphabetical materials and with totally different experimental procedures (Cole, 1973;Crowder, 1971Crowder, , 1973Darwin & Baddeley, 1974;Smallwood & Tromater, 1971). Darwin and Baddeley (1974) have argued that these results reflect a general property of acoustic memory 1 and that stop consonants which show most acoustic restructuring with context are the most ephemeral in acoustic memory.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 87%

Speech recoding in reading Chinese characters.

Tzeng¹,

Hung²,

Wang³

1977

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory

114

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Two experiments were conducted with Chinese subj ects to investigate whether phonemic similarity affected the visual information processing of Chinese characters. The first experiment used a short-term retention paradigm and the second, a sentence judgment task. In both experiments the subject's performance was found to be impaired by the introduction of phonemic similarity into the test materials. The results were discussed with respect to the issues of orthographical differences and of speech receding in reading.Dyslexia is ostensibly uncommon in Japan (Makita, 1968), and it has been suggested that this is attributable to the Japanese use of ideographic scripts (Kanji). Research reported by Rozin, Poritsky, and Sotsky (1971) seems to support this thesis. They showed that a group of Philadelphia second-grade school children with serious reading problems that had persisted even after extensive tutoring by conventional methods were able to make rapid progress in learning and reading an ideographic writing system such as Chinese. Rozin et al. (1971) suggest, "The success of this program can be attributed to the novelty of the Chinese orthography and to the fact that Chinese characters map into speech at the level of words rather than of phonemes" (p. 1266).The idea of teaching the dyslexic to read Chinese is by no means a new one. According to Hinshelwood (1917), Bishop Harmon suggested that the ideal therapy for this disorder was to teach Chinese to dyslexics, because Chinese is a sign script where each word has its own symbol. The success of Rozin et al. (1971) eliminates the interpretation of dyslexia as a visual-auditory

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 87%

Speech recoding in reading Chinese characters.

Tzeng¹,

Hung²,

Wang³

1977

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory

114

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Several researchers (e.g., Cutting & Rosner, 1974;Kewley-Port, Watson, & Foyle, 1988;Miller, Wier, Pastore, Kelly,& Dooling, 1976) have indeed reported this. We have already noted that shortened vowels are perceived more categorically than longer vowels (Crowder, 1973a;Pisoni, 1973). Finally, the current view predicts that adding noise to vowel stimuli should also produce more categorical perception (Lane, 1965).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…Vowels have an advantage over stop consonants because the auditory information is still present in some sort ofsensory code, resulting in two possible codes that can be used to identify the item. This type of explanation has been given some additional support by research that shows nearly categorical responding, poor discrimination, and poor serial recall for very short synthetic vowels (e.g., Crowder, 1973a;Pisoni, 1973).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The relation between discriminability and memory for vowels, consonants, and silent-center vowels

Surprenant

Neath

1996

Memory & Cognition

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

People remember lists of vowel-contrasting syllables better than lists that vary only in stop consonant identity. Most views suggest that this difference is due to the structure of immediate memory and the greater discriminability of vowels compared with consonants. In all of these views, there is a presumed systematic relationship between discriminability and recall so that the more discriminable an item, the better that item should be recalled. The 11 experiments reported here measured the relative discriminability of and compared serial recall for (1) intact syllables that varied only in the medial vowel, (2) intact syllables that varied only in the initial consonant, and (3) syllables with the center vowel replaced by silence (so-called silent-center vowels). Whenitem discriminability, as measured by identification, was equated for consonant-contrasting and silent-center lists, serial recall performance was also equal. However, even when the vowels were less discriminable than the consonants or silentcenter vowels, serial recall performance for the vowels.was still better. These results are problematic for theories based on acoustic discriminability but can be explained parsimoniously by Nairne's (1990) feature model.Theories detailing how people briefly retain the auditory characteristics of sound have been deeply influenced by research on memory for vowels and consonants. A number ofdifferent paradigms, including categorical perception, imagery, and serial list recall, have all demonstrated impoverished performance for stop consonants compared to that for vowels (see Surprenant, 1992, for a review). Most of the explanations of these results rely on an interaction between the structure of immediate memory and the relative discriminability of the items in the stimulus set.Several experiments have revealed differences in memory for vowels and stop consonants with a serial list recall task. In this paradigm, subjects are asked to recall a list of items in the order in which they were presented. When auditory-or vocalized-presentation is used, people generally recall the first few items well (the primacy effect) and the last few items well (the recency effect) relative to the middle items (Crowder, 1976). When visual presentation is used, there is no recency effect (LeCompte, 1992),and this difference between auditory and visual presentation is known as the modality effect (see Penney, 1989, for a review). When the to-be-remembered items are syllables that differ only in the vowel sounds, there is a particularly large and robust recency effect compared with when the Some of this research was supported by an NIDCD Individual National Research Service Award to A.M.S., and portions of these data were presented at the 35th Annual Meeting of the Psychonomic Society, St. Louis, November 1994. We thank J. S. Nairne for comments on an earlier version of this manuscript. Correspondence should be addressed to A. M. Surprenant, 1364 Psychological Sciences Building, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 47907-1364 (e-mail:...

show abstract

“…/ba/, /bi/, /bu/) (Crowder, 1971: Cole, 1973, de Gelder & Vroomen, 1994. There are also indications that recency is more pronounced for long than for short vowels (Crowder, 1973). In other words, there is a general tendency for auditory recency to be weaker for speech sounds that are categorically perceived.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 94%

Precategorical acoustic storage and the perception of speech

Frankish

2008

Journal of Memory and Language

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Precategorical acoustic storage for vowels of short and long duration

Cited by 25 publications

References 8 publications

Speech recoding in reading Chinese characters.

Speech recoding in reading Chinese characters.

The relation between discriminability and memory for vowels, consonants, and silent-center vowels

Precategorical acoustic storage and the perception of speech

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About