The effect of exposure to a single vowel on talker normalization for vowels.

The current work investigated the role of single vowels in talker normalization. Following initial training to identify six talkers from the isolated vowel /i/, participants were asked to identify vowels in three different conditions. In the blocked-talker conditions, the vowels were blocked by talker. In the mixed-talker conditions, vowels from all six talkers were presented in random order. The precursor mixed-talker conditions were identical to the mixed-talker conditions except that participants were provided with either a sample vowel or just the written name of a talker before target-vowel presentation. In experiment 1, the precursor vowel was always spoken by the same talker as the target vowel. Identification accuracy did not differ significantly for the blocked and precursor mixed-talker conditions and both were better than the pure mixed-talker condition. In experiment 2, half of the trials had a precursor spoken by the same talker as the target and half had a different talker. For the same-talker precursor condition, the results replicated those in experiment 1. In the different-talker precursor, no benefit was observed relative to the pure-mixed condition. In experiment 3, only the written name was presented as a precursor and no benefits were observed relative to the pure-mixed condition.

[1]  Keith Johnson,et al.  The role of perceived speaker identity in F0 normalization of vowels. , 1990, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[2]  Elizabeth A. Strand Uncovering the Role of Gender Stereotypes in Speech Perception , 1999 .

[3]  T. M. Nearey Static, dynamic, and relational properties in vowel perception. , 1989, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[4]  H. Nusbaum,et al.  Acoustic differences, listener expectations, and the perceptual accommodation of talker variability. , 2007, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[5]  L. Holt,et al.  Listening for the Norm: Adaptive Coding in Speech Categorization , 2012, Front. Psychology.

[6]  H. Nusbaum,et al.  Neural Bases of Talker Normalization , 2004, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

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

[8]  Abeer Alwan,et al.  Subglottal resonances of adult male and female native speakers of American English. , 2012, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[9]  Caroline G. Henton,et al.  Fact and fiction in the description of female and male pitch , 1987 .

[10]  D H Whalen,et al.  The effects of breath sounds on the perception of synthetic speech. , 1995, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[11]  J. L. Miller Some Effects of Speaking Rate on Phonetic Perception , 1981, Phonetica.

[12]  A M Liberman,et al.  Perception of the speech code. , 1967, Psychological review.

[13]  Caroline G. Henton,et al.  Breathiness in normal female speech: Inefficiency versus desirability , 1985 .

[14]  G. E. Peterson,et al.  Control Methods Used in a Study of the Vowels , 1951 .

[15]  D. Broadbent,et al.  Information Conveyed by Vowels , 1957 .

[16]  H. S. Gopal,et al.  A perceptual model of vowel recognition based on the auditory representation of American English vowels. , 1986, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[17]  Matthias J. Sjerps,et al.  Constraints on the processes responsible for the extrinsic normalization of vowels , 2011, Attention, perception & psychophysics.

[18]  H. Traunmüller Perceptual dimension of openness in vowels. , 1981, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[19]  J L Miller,et al.  The influence of sentential speaking rate on the internal structure of phonetic categories. , 1994, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[20]  J. Mullennix,et al.  Some effects of talker variability on spoken word recognition. , 1989, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[21]  Stimulus variability and spoken word recognition. II. The effects of age and hearing impairment , 1996 .

[22]  J. Hillenbrand,et al.  Acoustic characteristics of American English vowels. , 1994, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[23]  J. Mullennix,et al.  Some consequences of stimulus variability on speech processing by 2-month-old infants , 1992, Cognition.

[24]  Elizabeth A. Strand,et al.  Auditory–visual integration of talker gender in vowel perception , 1999 .