Regional and Foreign Accent Processing in English: Can Listeners Adapt?

Abstract

Recent data suggest that the first presentation of a foreign accent triggers a delay in word identification, followed by a subsequent adaptation. This study examines under what conditions the delay resumes to baseline level. The delay will be experimentally induced by the presentation of sentences spoken to listeners in a foreign or a regional accent as part of a lexical decision task for words placed at the end of sentences. Using a blocked design of accents presentation, Experiment 1 shows that accent changes cause a temporary perturbation in reaction times, followed by a smaller but long-lasting delay. Experiment 2 shows that the initial perturbation is dependent on participants' expectations about the task. Experiment 3 confirms that the subsequent long-lasting delay in word identification does not habituate after repeated exposure to the same accent. Results suggest that comprehensibility of accented speech, as measured by reaction times, does not benefit from accent exposure, contrary to intelligibility.

Spoken-word recognition in foreign-accented speech by L2 listeners

“…In general, two languages overlap less in their phonology than two varieties of one language do. Floccia, Butler, Goslin, and Ellis (2009), for example, have argued that foreign accents tend to affect all phonemes, whereas dialects mainly affect vowels. With respect to perceived accentedness, regional accents are also judged to be more similar to the standard variety of a language than foreign accents are (Floccia, Goslin, Girard, & Konopcynski, 2006).…”

Cross-Accent Intelligibility of Speech in Noise: Long-Term Familiarity and Short-Term Familiarization

“…However, Floccia et al (2009) found that listeners' reaction times never recovered from the initial disruption caused by an accent switch. It is difficult to tease this issue apart by conducting further tests of this type away from a formal laboratory setting, but future research could manipulate the accent of the experimenter to see, for example, if a GE speaking experimenter would elicit different results.…”

“…Nathan, Wells & Donlan, 1998;Nathan & Wells, 2001;Fraser Gupta 2005;Floccia, Goslin, Girard, & Konopczynski, 2006;Floccia, Butler, Goslin, & Ellis, 2009;Adank, Evans, Stuart-Smith, & Scott, 2009;Sumner & Samuel, 2009). The typical pattern is that speech in one's own accent is easier to understand than speech in a different regional accent, which in turn is easier to understand than non-native accented speech (Adank et al, 2009;Floccia et al, 2006; but see also Floccia et al, 2009). The processing costs associated with listening to other accents may arise because the acoustic-phonetic input from another accent produces either weak activation of intended words, and/or inappropriate activation of competitor words (Clopper, Pierrehumbert & Tamati, 2010;Dahan, Drucker & Scarborough, 2008).…”

“…Floccia et al (2009) showed that participants' expectations about the accents to be heard (based on experimental instructions) affected their response times, while Hay & Drager (2010) demonstrated that even when an experimenter simply attracts participants' attention in an incidental manner to a toy kangaroo, koala or kiwi this can markedly affect listeners' interpretation of incoming speech as spoken with an Australian or New Zealand accent.…”

Where do dialectal effects on speech processing come from? Evidence from a cross-dialect investigation

“…A great deal of recent research has shown that it is necessary to consider the differences and commonalities between bilinguals' and monolinguals' speech processing. Our study thus tests whether bilinguals' linguistic experience affects the way they adjust to regional accents, as it does in monolinguals (e.g., Conrey et al, 2005;Dufour et al, 2013;Floccia, Butler, Goslin, & Ellis, 2009;Floccia et al, 2006).…”