2010
DOI: 10.1515/labphon.2010.022
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Signal-based and expectation-based factors in the perception of prosodic prominence

Abstract: The perception of prosodic prominence in spontaneous speech is investigated through an online task of prosody transcription using untrained listeners. Prominence is indexed through a probabilistic prominence score assigned to each word based on the proportion of transcribers who perceived the word as prominent. Correlation and regression analyses between perceived prominence, acoustic measures and measures of a word's information status are conducted to test three hypotheses: (i) prominence perception is signa… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

12
146
1

Year Published

2014
2014
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
4
2
1
1

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 167 publications
(171 citation statements)
references
References 30 publications
12
146
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Comparing the current findings with our prior results using RPT (e.g., Cole et al, 2010aCole et al, , 2010b, we observe similar agreement rates for boundary rating, and somewhat lower agreement for prominence rating. In that earlier study, Fleiss' kappa scores were separately calculated for four cohorts of 15-22 annotators each, with kappa scores for boundary ratings between .54-.62, and kappa scores for prominence ratings between .37-.42.…”
Section: Inter-annotator Agreement (Q1 Q2)supporting
confidence: 86%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Comparing the current findings with our prior results using RPT (e.g., Cole et al, 2010aCole et al, , 2010b, we observe similar agreement rates for boundary rating, and somewhat lower agreement for prominence rating. In that earlier study, Fleiss' kappa scores were separately calculated for four cohorts of 15-22 annotators each, with kappa scores for boundary ratings between .54-.62, and kappa scores for prominence ratings between .37-.42.…”
Section: Inter-annotator Agreement (Q1 Q2)supporting
confidence: 86%
“…The method of Rapid Prosodic Transcription (RPT) was used to elicit prosodic ratings (i.e., annotations) of each word (Cole et al, 2010a;Cole et al, 2010b). Transcription tasks were administered using a custom web-based presentation and annotation tool (LMEDS: Mahrt, 2016).…”
Section: Prosodic Transcription With Rapid Prosodic Transcription Andmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Earlier research (Kakouros and Räsänen, 2016;Kakouros et al 2018) has proposed that unpredictable prosody may actually cause an impression of prominence (similarly to unpredictable words; see Cole et al, 2010) by triggering attentional resources in exactly the same way as surprising IDS intonation is proposed to capture infant attention in the present study. Less likely intonation was also found to alter semantic processing of the prominent words, as measured by electrophysiological recordings (Kakouros et al 2018).…”
Section: Open Questions and Concluding Remarksmentioning
confidence: 53%
“…In addition, recent work in adult speech perception suggests that low-probability intonation patterns in the context of otherwise predictable prosody are associated with higher perceptual prominence of the concurrent words (Kakouros & Räsänen, 2016). Moreover, low-probability prosodic events seem to alter the semantic processing of the speech (e.g., Magne et al, 2005;Kakouros, Salminen & Räsänen, 2018) similarly to low-probability lexical items in a predictive context (e.g., Cole, Mo & Hasegawa-Johnson, 2010). Recent preliminary findings also suggest that adult listeners are sensitive, and rapidly adapt, to changing statistical properties of the intonation patterns and this leads to experience-based expectations for prosody (Kakouros et al, 2018).…”
Section: Stimulus-driven Attention and Statistical Learningmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…11 [4], 4 [5], or 3 [6]. [7,8] operationalize continuous prominence annotations as binary impressions of word prominence cumulated across several listeners. For an illustration of the most popular approaches to prominence analysis, cf.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%