The Effects of Talker Variability and Frequency of Exposure on the Acquisition of Spoken Word Knowledge

Uchihara, Takumi; Webb, Stuart; Saito, Kazuya; Trofimovich, Pavel

doi:10.1017/s0272263121000218

Cited by 10 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 57 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Conversely, in Experiment 1b, the retest, we observed the effect of variability in the picture-to-L2 naming task but not in the L2-to-L1 translation task. Researchers have often interpreted null effects of speaker variability on L2 learning as a ceiling effect (i.e., task too easy; Sinkeviciute et al, 2019;Uchihara et al, 2021) or a floor effect (i.e., task too difficult; Runge, 2018) in overall performance. As we have described, numerically, accuracy in the picture-to-L2 naming task of Experiment 1a was far better than has previously been reported in L2 oral languages (e.g., Barcroft & Sommers, 2005.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The More the Merrier? On the Influence of Indexical Variability on Second Language Vocabulary Learning

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We investigated indexical variation as a variable that promotes second language (L2) vocabulary learning across language modalities. In three experiments, we presented Catalan Sign Language signs (Experiments 1a and 1b), pseudowords (Experiment 2), and English words (Experiment 3) to participants in three conditions that varied in the number of people who introduced these stimuli (one, three, or six people). We evaluated learning outcomes in two recall tasks: a picture-to-L2 naming task and a L2-to-L1 translation task. For the sign modality, indexical variation benefitted the immediate recall of signs in the translation task (Experiment 1a) and delayed recall

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The More the Merrier? On the Influence of Indexical Variability on Second Language Vocabulary Learning

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Despite the efficacy of HVPT, the role of input variability in L2 speech learning is still controversial and underappreciated. As most HVPT studies did not attempt to isolate or determine the specific source of variability which may lead to robust learning of L2 speech sounds, it remains an open question why some studies found an advantage of talker variability (Brosseau-Lapré et al, 2013;Deng et al, 2018;Hardison, 2003;Kartushina & Martin, 2019;Lively et al, 1993;Perrachione et al, 2011;Uchihara et al, 2022), while others did not (Brekelmans et al, 2022;Dong et al, 2019;Giannakopoulou et al, 2017;Wiener et al, 2020). Our recent training studies (Cheng et al, 2019; provided tentative evidence that generalization can be induced by acoustic variability in phonetically irrelevant (or secondary) cues that may reside in but are not limited to talker variability.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 87%

Cognitive Factors in Nonnative Phonetic Learning: Impacts of Working Memory and Selective Attention on the Benefits and Costs of Talker Variability

Zhang¹,

Cheng²,

Zhang³

2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Talker variability has been reported to facilitate generalization and retention of speech learning, but is also shown to place demands on cognitive resources. Our recent study provided evidence that phonetically-irrelevant acoustic variability in single-talker (ST) speech is sufficient to induce equivalent amounts of learning to the use of multiple-talker (MT) training. This study is a follow-up contrasting MT versus ST training with varying degrees of temporal exaggeration to examine how cognitive measures of individual learners may influence the role of input variability in immediate learning and long-term retention. Native Chinese-speaking adults were trained on the English /i/-/ɪ/ contrast. We assessed the trainees’ working memory and selective attention before training. Trained participants showed retention of more native-like cue weighting in both perception and production regardless of talker variability condition. The ST training group showed long-term benefit in word identification, whereas the MT training group did not retain the improvement. The results demonstrate the role of phonetically-irrelevant variability in robust speech learning and modulatory functions of nonlinguistic working memory and selective attention, highlighting the necessity to consider the interaction between input characteristics, task difficulty, and individual differences in cognitive abilities in assessing learning outcomes.

show abstract

“…Previous studies have also examined the effects of lexical and phraseological features in L2 written and spoken responses on human ratings of L2 performances. Studies have reported that lexical complexity is predictive of L2 writing (e.g., Biber et al, 2016;Kyle and Crossley, 2016;Kim et al, 2018) and L2 speaking (e.g., Crossley et al, 2011;Eguchi and Kyle, 2020), and that phraseological complexity (when measured by MI and not t-scores) is predictive of L2 writing (e.g., Bestgen and Granger, 2018;Kim et al, 2018;Garner et al, 2019;Paquot, 2019) and L2 speaking (e.g., Eguchi and Kyle, 2020;Saito, 2020;Uchihara et al, 2021). Findings from these studies suggest that producing more complex lexical units and more strongly associated phraseological units is associated with better L2 written and spoken performances.…”

Section: Lexical and Phraseological Complexity L2 Vocabulary Knowledg...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Lexical and phraseological differences between second language written and spoken opinion responses

Kim

Crossley²

2023

Front. Psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study examines differences in lexical and phraseological complexity features between second language (L2) written and spoken opinion responses via classification analysis. The study further examines the characteristics of L2 written and spoken responses that were misclassified in terms of lexical and phraseological differences, L2 learners’ vocabulary knowledge, and raters’ judgments of L2 use. The goal is to more thoroughly explore potential differences in lexical and phraseological production based on modality. The results indicated that L2 written responses tended to elicit greater lexical and phraseological complexity. The results also indicated that crossing the boundaries from L2 spoken to written (i.e., the use of less lexical and phraseological complexity) was related to lower levels of L2 vocabulary knowledge and tended to be penalized by raters in terms of L2 use. In contrast, crossing the boundaries from L2 written output to spoken (i.e., the use of greater lexical and phraseological complexity) was acceptable in terms of L2 use. Overall, this study highlights lexical and phraseological differences and the importance of the use of greater lexical and phraseological complexity in a modality-insensitive manner in L2 opinion-giving responses.

show abstract

The Effects of Talker Variability and Frequency of Exposure on the Acquisition of Spoken Word Knowledge

Cited by 10 publications

References 57 publications

The More the Merrier? On the Influence of Indexical Variability on Second Language Vocabulary Learning

The More the Merrier? On the Influence of Indexical Variability on Second Language Vocabulary Learning

Cognitive Factors in Nonnative Phonetic Learning: Impacts of Working Memory and Selective Attention on the Benefits and Costs of Talker Variability

Lexical and phraseological differences between second language written and spoken opinion responses

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About