Speech Perception Takes Precedence Over Nonspeech Perception

Whalen, D. H.; Liberman, Alvin M.

doi:10.1126/science.3603014

Cited by 155 publications

(141 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

122

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…It is possible that the phonetically relevant sensitivities stem from limits in the resolving power of the auditory system, so that some physical differences are simply more discriminable than others, and that human languages are organized around these auditory sensitivities (Aslin, 1987;Kuhl & Miller, 1975;Pisoni, 1979). On the basis of these data, it is also possible that the close relationship between initial (phonetically relevant) perception and the subsequent languagespecific phonetic categories stems from a specialized speechperception module (Fodor, 1983;Liberman & Mattingly, 1985;Mattingly & Liberman, in press;Whalen & Liberman, 1987).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cross-language speech perception: Initial capabilities and developmental change.

Werker¹,

Lalonde²

1988

Developmental Psychology

464

278

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article reports three studies designed to increase our understanding of developmental changes in cross-language speech perception. In the first study, we compared adult speakers of English and Hindi on their ability to discriminate pairings from a synthetic voiced, unaspirated place-of-articulation continuum. Results indicated that English listeners discriminate two categories (ba vs. (Ja), whereas Hindi listeners discriminate three (ba vs. da, and da vs. Da). We then used stimuli from within this continuum in the next two experiments to determine (a) if our previously reported finding (Werker & Tees, 1984a) of a reorganization between 6 and 12 months of life from "universal" to "language-specific" phonetic perception would be evident using synthetic (rather than natural) stimuli in which the physical variability within and between categories could be controlled, and (b) whether the younger infants' sensitivity to nonnative speech contrasts is best explained by reference to the phonetic relevance or the physical similarity of the stimuli. In addition to replicating the developmental reorganization, the results indicate that infant speech perception is phonetically relevant. We discuss the implications of these results.Since the early 1970s researchers have been studying infant speech perception, partly in an attempt to determine if there is evidence for a specialized phonetic mode of processing among infants. In a now-classic study, Eimas, Siqueland, Jusczyk, and Vigorito (1971) demonstrated that English-learning infants aged 1 to 4 months show far better discrimination along a synthetic voice onset time (VOT) continuum for two stimuli that straddle the adult /ba/-/pa/ phonetic category boundary than they do for two equally acoustically distinct stimuli from within the same phonetic category. This differential discrimination at some, rather than other, points along a single synthetic continuum indicates that speech perception may be "categorical" in infants. This finding has now been replicated many times with infants using several other distinctions (for reviews, see Aslin, 1987;Kuhl, 1987).

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cross-language speech perception: Initial capabilities and developmental change.

Werker¹,

Lalonde²

1988

Developmental Psychology

464

278

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Segments of a phoneme sound qualitatively different in isolation than when embedded in the context of the phoneme (e.g., Mann & Liberman, 1983;Whalen & Liberman, 1987). For example, when part of the early waveform of the syllable da or ga (specifically, the pitch glide of the third formant) is isolated, it sounds like a chirp that differs in quality from human speech.…”

Section: Language Perceptionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Perceiving imitatible stimuli: Consequences of isomorphism between input and output.

Wilson

2001

Psychological Bulletin

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

For more than a century, psychologists have been intrigued by the idea that mental representations of perceived human actions are closely connected with mental representations of performing those same actions. In this article, connections between input and output representations are considered in terms of the potential for imitation. A broad range of evidence suggests that, for imitatible stimuli, input and output representations are isomorphic to one another, allowing mutual influence between perception and motoric planning that is rapid, effortless, and possibly obligatory. Thus, the cognitive consequences of imitatibility may underlie such diverse phenomena as phoneme perception; imitation in neonates; echoic memory; stimulus-response compatibility; conduction aphasia; maintenance rehearsal; and a variety of developmental and social activities such as language acquisition, social learning, empathy, and monitoring one's own behavior.

show abstract

“…This categorical perception was believed to be the hallmark of the speech perception 'mode'. A particularly compelling observation, for instance, was made by Whalen & Liberman (1987), who noted that the identical formant transition could be perceived categorically or not depending on whether it formed part of a sound complex perceived as a speech syllable or not. This sort of evidence suggested that the physical cues themselves are insufficient to explain the perceptual categorization phenomena.…”

Section: Evidence That Simple Acoustic Features Of Sounds Can Explainmentioning

confidence: 99%

Neural specializations for speech and pitch: moving beyond the dichotomies

Zatorre¹,

Gandour

2007

Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B

332

262

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The idea that speech processing relies on unique, encapsulated, domain-specific mechanisms has been around for some time. Another well-known idea, often espoused as being in opposition to the first proposal, is that processing of speech sounds entails general-purpose neural mechanisms sensitive to the acoustic features that are present in speech. Here, we suggest that these dichotomous views need not be mutually exclusive. Specifically, there is now extensive evidence that spectral and temporal acoustical properties predict the relative specialization of right and left auditory cortices, and that this is a parsimonious way to account not only for the processing of speech sounds, but also for non-speech sounds such as musical tones. We also point out that there is equally compelling evidence that neural responses elicited by speech sounds can differ depending on more abstract, linguistically relevant properties of a stimulus (such as whether it forms part of one's language or not). Tonal languages provide a particularly valuable window to understand the interplay between these processes. The key to reconciling these phenomena probably lies in understanding the interactions between afferent pathways that carry stimulus information, with top-down processing mechanisms that modulate these processes. Although we are still far from the point of having a complete picture, we argue that moving forward will require us to abandon the dichotomy argument in favour of a more integrated approach.

show abstract

Speech Perception Takes Precedence Over Nonspeech Perception

Cited by 155 publications

References 7 publications

Cross-language speech perception: Initial capabilities and developmental change.

Cross-language speech perception: Initial capabilities and developmental change.

Perceiving imitatible stimuli: Consequences of isomorphism between input and output.

Neural specializations for speech and pitch: moving beyond the dichotomies

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About