How lexical is the lexicon? Evidence for integrated auditory memory representations

Previous research has shown that lexical representations must include not only linguistic information (what word was said), but also indexical information (how it was said, and by whom). The present work demonstrates that even this expansion is not sufficient. Seemingly irrelevant information, such as an unattended background sound, is retained in memory and can facilitate subsequent speech perception. We presented participants with spoken words paired with environmental sounds (e.g., a phone ringing), and had them make an "animate/inanimate" decision for each word. Later performance identifying filtered versions of the words was impaired to a similar degree if the voice changed or if the environmental sound changed. Moreover, when quite dissimilar words were used at exposure and test, we observed the same result when we reversed the roles of the words and the environmental sounds. The experiments also demonstrated limits to these effects, with no benefit from repetition. Theoretically, our results support two alternative possibilities: (1) Lexical representations are memory representations, and are not walled off from those for other sounds. Indexical effects reflect simply one type of co-occurrence that is incorporated into such representations. (2) The existing literature on indexical effects does not actually bear on lexical representations - voice changes, like environmental sounds heard with a word, produce implicit memory effects that are not tied to the lexicon. We discuss the evidence and implications of these two theoretical alternatives.

[1]  D. Pisoni,et al.  Speech Perception as a Talker-Contingent Process , 1993, Psychological science.

[2]  S. Goldinger Words and voices: episodic traces in spoken word identification and recognition memory. , 1996, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[3]  R Core Team,et al.  R: A language and environment for statistical computing. , 2014 .

[4]  Winston D. Goh Talker variability and recognition memory: instance-specific and voice-specific effects. , 2005, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[5]  Sarah C. Creel,et al.  Heeding the voice of experience: The role of talker variation in lexical access , 2008, Cognition.

[6]  William D. Marslen-Wilson,et al.  Integrating Form and Meaning: A Distributed Model of Speech Perception. , 1997 .

[7]  D. Pisoni,et al.  Effects of talker, rate, and amplitude variation on recognition memory for spoken words , 1999, Perception & psychophysics.

[8]  D. Gallo,et al.  Direct comparison of auditory implicit memory tests , 2000, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[9]  M. Mattson,et al.  From words to meaning: A semantic illusion , 1981 .

[10]  A. Samuel,et al.  Generalization in perceptual learning for speech , 2006, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[11]  Anne Cutler,et al.  Listening experience and phonetic-to-lexical mapping in L2 , 2007 .

[12]  D. Pisoni,et al.  Talker-specific learning in speech perception , 1998, Perception & psychophysics.

[13]  N. Mesgarani,et al.  Selective cortical representation of attended speaker in multi-talker speech perception , 2012, Nature.

[14]  J. Elman An alternative view of the mental lexicon , 2004, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[15]  P. Luce,et al.  Spoken Word Recognition: The Challenge of Variation , 2005 .

[16]  D. Norris,et al.  Perceptual learning in speech , 2003, Cognitive Psychology.

[17]  D. Norris Shortlist: a connectionist model of continuous speech recognition , 1994, Cognition.

[18]  Michael A. Cohen,et al.  Auditory and visual memory in musicians and nonmusicians , 2011, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[19]  S. M. Sheffert,et al.  Voice-specificity effects on auditory word priming , 1998, Memory & cognition.

[20]  D. Schacter,et al.  Perceptual specificity of auditory priming: implicit memory for voice intonation and fundamental frequency. , 1994, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[21]  C. Mclennan,et al.  Hemispheric Differences in the Recognition of Environmental Sounds , 2008, Psychological science.

[22]  Joanne L. Miller,et al.  Listener sensitivity to individual talker differences in voice-onset-time. , 2004, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[23]  W. Marslen-Wilson,et al.  Representation and competition in the perception of spoken words , 2002, Cognitive Psychology.

[24]  S. Goldinger,et al.  Episodic encoding of voice attributes and recognition memory for spoken words. , 1993, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[25]  H L Roediger,et al.  Implicit memory. Retention without remembering. , 1990, The American psychologist.

[26]  A G Samuel,et al.  More adaptation of speech by nonspeech. , 1984, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[27]  Auditory priming: implicit and explicit memory for words and voices. , 1992 .

[28]  Janet B. Pierrehumbert,et al.  Exemplar dynamics: Word frequency, lenition and contrast , 2000 .

[29]  M. Gareth Gaskell,et al.  Ambiguity, competition, and blending in spoken word recognition , 1999, Cogn. Sci..

[30]  C Y Chiu,et al.  Specificity of auditory implicit and explicit memory: is perceptual priming for environmental sounds exemplar specific? , 2000, Memory & cognition.

[31]  S. Goldinger,et al.  Phonetic priming, neighborhood activation, and PARSYN , 2000, Perception & psychophysics.

[32]  P. Luce,et al.  Specificity of memory representations for spoken words , 1998, Memory & cognition.

[33]  R. Harald Baayen,et al.  Analyzing linguistic data: a practical introduction to statistics using R, 1st Edition , 2008 .

[34]  Melissa K. Gregg,et al.  Change deafness and the organizational properties of sounds. , 2008, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[35]  R. Jacobs,et al.  Perception of speech reflects optimal use of probabilistic speech cues , 2008, Cognition.

[36]  James L. McClelland,et al.  The TRACE model of speech perception , 1986, Cognitive Psychology.

[37]  D. Norris,et al.  Shortlist B: a Bayesian model of continuous speech recognition. , 2008, Psychological review.

[38]  Julio González,et al.  Hemispheric differences in indexical specificity effects in spoken word recognition. , 2007, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[39]  Keith Johnson,et al.  Resonance in an exemplar-based lexicon: The emergence of social identity and phonology , 2006, J. Phonetics.

[40]  S. Goldinger A COMPLEMENTARY-SYSTEMS APPROACH TO ABSTRACT AND EPISODIC SPEECH PERCEPTION , 2007 .

[41]  Matthias J. Sjerps,et al.  Speaker Normalization in Speech Perception , 2008, The Handbook of Speech Perception.

[42]  J. Elman On the Meaning of Words and Dinosaur Bones: Lexical Knowledge Without a Lexicon , 2009, Cogn. Sci..

[43]  S. Goldinger Echoes of echoes? An episodic theory of lexical access. , 1998, Psychological review.