Skip to main content

Studies of Possible Psychoacoustic Factors Underlying Speech Perception

  • Chapter
Book cover The Psychophysics of Speech Perception

Part of the book series: NATO ASI Series ((ASID,volume 39))

Abstract

As with all sounds which are presented to the ear, speech sounds are subject to processing by the auditory system. Thus, whatever their importance for the listener, whatever the message conveyed, and however the listener may use linguistic knowledge, context, or other non-acoustic cues to assist in decoding the message from a speaker, the speech sounds which are presented to the listener’s ear are subject to the same “obligatory processing” as are nonspeech sounds. In some situations, we might expect that such obligatory processing would result in the diminution of the perceptual salience of an acoustic cue—for example, as a consequence of masking between two portions of a signal. In other circumstances, we might expect that the auditory system would enhance the perceptual salience of an acoustic cue—for example, as a consequence of spectral-temporal integration. Of course the extent to which both perceptual factors and higher-order variables influence the responses which are actually observed in an experiment will reflect the demands of the particular task which is set for the listener (cf., the paper by MacMillan, Braida, Goldberg, and Khazatsky, in this volume, for further discussion of this point).

The research reported here was supported by grants from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council, Health and Welfare Canada, and the Alberta Heritage Foundation for Medical Research. I am grateful to Fred Wightman and Terry Dolan for their hospitality while I was a Visiting Fellow at the Waisman Center, University of Wisconsin, Madison, and to Peter Assman, Meg Cheesman, Vince Dilollo, Bias Espinoza-Varas, Tom Johnson, Linda McEvoy, Terry Nearey, Curtis Ponton, Mike Procter, Anton Rozsypal, and Susan Rvachew for their advice and assistance at various stages of the project. Special thanks are due to Elzbieta Slawinska with whom much of this work was undertaken.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 259.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 329.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 329.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Dorman, M., Cutting, J., and Raphael, L. (1975). Perception of temporal order in vowel sequences with and without formant transitions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 104, 121–129.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Eimas, P.D. and Miller, J.L. (1980). Contextual effects in infant speech perception. Science, 209, 1140–1141.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Hillenbrand, J. (1984). Perception of sine-wave analogs of voice onset time stimuli. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 75, 231–240.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Hirsh, I.J. (1959). Auditory perception of temporal order. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 75, 231–240.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Holmes, J.N., Mattingly, I., and Shearme, J. (1964). Speech synthesis by rule.. Language and Speech, 7, 127–143.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Howell, P. and Rosen, S. (1983). Natural auditory sensitivities as universal determiners of phonemic contrasts. Linguistics, 21, 205–235.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Jamieson, D.G., Johson, T., and Rvachew, S. (1986). A role for intra-speech masking in “rate-normalization” on a stop-semivowel continuum. Alberta Conference on Language, Banff.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Jamieson, D.G. and Slawinska, E.B. (1983). Sensitivity to rate-of-change of frequency transition. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, Suppl. 1 74, S67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Jamieson, D.G. and Slawinska, E.B. (1984). The discriminability of transition duration: Effects of the amplitude and duration of following steady state. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, Suppl. 1 76, S29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Jusczyk, P., Pisoni, D., Walley, A., and Murray, J. (1980). Discrimination of relative onset time of two-component tones by infants. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 67, 262–270.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Liberman, A., Cooper, F., Shankweiler, D., and Studdert-Kennedy, M. (1967). Perception of the speech code. Psychological Review, 74, 431–461.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Liberman, A.M., Ingemann, F., Lisker, L., Delattre, P., and Cooper, F. (1959). Minimal rules for synthesizing speech. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 31, 1490–1499.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Lisker, L. and Abramson, A.S. (1970). The voicing dimension: Some experiments in comparative phonetics. Proceedings of the sixth international congress of phonetic sciences. Prague: Academia, 563–567.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Luce, R.D. (1963). Discrimination. In: R. Luce and E. Galanter (Eds*), Handbook of Mathematical Psychology, Willey: New York.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Miller, J.L. and Liberman, A.M. (1979). Some effects of later-occurring information on the perception of stop consonant and semivowel. Perception & Psychophysics, 25, 457–465.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Morse, P. (1972). The discrimination of speech and nonspeech in early infancy. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 14, 477.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Nabelek, A. and Hirsh, J.I. (1969). On the discrimination of frequency transitions. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 45, 1510–1519.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Pastore, R. (1981). Possible psychoacoustic factors in speech perception. In: P. Eimas and J. Miller (Eds.), Perspectives on the Study of Speech, Lawrence Erlbaum: Hillsdale, N.J.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Pastore, R.E., Harris, L.B., and Kaplan, J.K. (1981). Temporal order identification: Some parameter dependencies. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 71, 430–436.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Pisoni, D. (1977). Identification and discrimination of the relative onset time of two component tones. Implications for voicing perception in stops. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 61, 1352–1361.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Port, R. (1981). Linguistic timing factors in combination. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 69, 262–274.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Potter, R, Kopp, G., and Kopp, H. (1966). Visible Speech. New York: Dover Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Remez, R., Rubin, P., Pisoni, D., and Carell, T. (1981). Speech perception without traditional speech cues. Science, 212, 947–950.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Robinson, D. and Dadson, R. (1956). A re-determination of the equal-loudness relation for pure tones. British Journal of Applied Physics, 7, 166–181.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Rosen, S. and Howell, P. (1986). Auditory, articulatory and learning factors in categorical perception. In: S. Harnad (Ed.). Categorical perception, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press (in press).

    Google Scholar 

  26. Schouten, M.E.H. (1980). The case against a speech mode of perception. Acta Psychologica, 44, 71–98.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Shannon, C. and Weaver, W. (1949). The Mathematical Theory of Communication, Urbana, Illinois: University of Illinois Press.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Stevens, K. (1981). Constraints imposed by the auditory system on the properties used to classify speech sounds: Data from phonology, acoustics and psychoacoustics. In: T. Myers, J. Laver, and J. Anderson (Eds.), The Cognitive Representation of Speech. Amsterdam: North Holland.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Stevens, K.N. (1984). Evidence for the role of acoustic boundaries in the perception of speech sounds. Speech Communication Group: Working Papers Volume IV, Cambridge, M.A.: Research Laboratory of Electronics, MIT.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Strange, W., Jenkins, J., and Johnson, T. (1983). Dynamic specification of coarticulated vowels. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 74, 695–705.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1987 Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, Dordrecht

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Jamieson, D.G. (1987). Studies of Possible Psychoacoustic Factors Underlying Speech Perception. In: Schouten, M.E.H. (eds) The Psychophysics of Speech Perception. NATO ASI Series, vol 39. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-3629-4_17

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-3629-4_17

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht

  • Print ISBN: 978-94-010-8123-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-94-009-3629-4

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics