Phonemic restoration in a sentence context: Evidence from early and late ERP effects

When a particular speech sound is obliterated and replaced by a non-speech sound in continuous speech the listener may not notice any disturbance in speech or have difficulties in understanding the word. The present study examined for the first time neurophysiological correlates of the perception of words with an obliterated initial phoneme. Behavioral responses and event-related potentials (ERPs) were measured while participants listened to naturally spoken sentences which had a highly or less expected final word. Half of the sentences were manipulated to have a cough replacing the beginning of the final word, thus, reducing the initial phonetic information available for the word recognition. An N1-P2 complex indicated an automatic registration of the cough's onset. An early negativity to less expected relative to highly expected words was observed for phonetically intact words but not for manipulated words. Although the N400 effect to manipulated words was elicited later than to intact words, after the fragment onset, its amplitude was not enhanced. Further, no significant enhancement of the N400 was found for the manipulated highly expected words. This finding, together with behavioral results, indicated an easier integration of the manipulated highly expected words with the sentence context than of intact but less expected words. Taken together, the study demonstrates an efficient usage of both a context-driven expectancy of the suitable word as well as a stimulus-driven processing of the phonetic information during online perception of speech. The present ERP results support the earlier behavioral research in showing that phonemic restoration is not a bottom-up phenomenon but rather reflects a top-down repair process.

[1]  Colin M. Brown,et al.  Electrophysiological Evidence for Early Contextual Influences during Spoken-Word Recognition: N200 Versus N400 Effects , 2001, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[2]  P. Holcomb Semantic priming and stimulus degradation: implications for the role of the N400 in language processing. , 2007, Psychophysiology.

[3]  T. Picton,et al.  The N1 wave of the human electric and magnetic response to sound: a review and an analysis of the component structure. , 1987, Psychophysiology.

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

[5]  J. Suzuki,et al.  Effects of rise time on simultaneously recorded auditory-evoked potentials from the early, middle and late ranges. , 1979, Audiology : official organ of the International Society of Audiology.

[6]  Colin M. Brown,et al.  The N400 as a function of the level of processing. , 1995, Psychophysiology.

[7]  Kara D. Federmeier,et al.  Electrophysiology reveals semantic memory use in language comprehension , 2000, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

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

[9]  M. Kutas,et al.  Reading senseless sentences: brain potentials reflect semantic incongruity. , 1980, Science.

[10]  J. Connolly,et al.  Event-related potential sensitivity to acoustic and semantic properties of terminal words in sentences , 1992, Brain and Language.

[11]  R. M. Warren,et al.  Phonemic restorations based on subsequent context , 1974 .

[12]  John Morton,et al.  Psycholinguistics 2: Structures and Processes , 1980 .

[13]  Peter Hagoort,et al.  The Processing Nature of the N400: Evidence from Masked Priming , 1993, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[14]  John F Connolly,et al.  Activation in the anterior left auditory cortex associated with phonological analysis of speech input: localization of the phonological mismatch negativity response with MEG. , 2004, Brain research. Cognitive brain research.

[15]  Antje S. Meyer,et al.  Neurophysiological Manifestations of Phonological Processing: Latency Variation of a Negative ERP Component Timelocked to Phonological Mismatch , 1994, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[16]  W. Marslen-Wilson Functional parallelism in spoken word-recognition , 1987, Cognition.

[17]  Colin M. Brown,et al.  ERP effects of listening to speech: semantic ERP effects , 2000, Neuropsychologia.

[18]  M. Kutas,et al.  Brain potentials during reading reflect word expectancy and semantic association , 1984, Nature.

[19]  Peter Hagoort,et al.  On the electrophysiology of language comprehension: Implications for the human language system , 2000 .

[20]  A. Friederici,et al.  Processing a second language: Late learners''comprehension mechanisms as revealed by event-related b , 2001 .

[21]  R. M. Warren Perceptual Restoration of Missing Speech Sounds , 1970, Science.

[22]  A. Samuel Lexical Activation Produces Potent Phonemic Percepts , 1997, Cognitive Psychology.

[23]  A. Friederici,et al.  Event-related brain potentials during natural speech processing: effects of semantic, morphological and syntactic violations. , 1993, Brain research. Cognitive brain research.

[24]  H. Davis,et al.  Effects of duration and rise time of tone bursts on evoked V potentials. , 1968, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[25]  K Saermark,et al.  Dependence of the auditory evoked magnetic field (100 msec signal) of the human brain on the intensity of the stimulus. , 1985, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[26]  B. Moore An Introduction to the Psychology of Hearing , 1977 .

[27]  H. Neville,et al.  Visual and auditory sentence processing: A developmental analysis using event‐related brain potentials , 1992 .

[28]  K Alho,et al.  Phonological aspects of word recognition as revealed by high-resolution spatio-temporal brain mapping , 2001, Neuroreport.

[29]  M. Pickering,et al.  Architectures and Mechanisms for Language Processing , 1999 .

[30]  R. M. Warren,et al.  Speech perception and phonemic restorations , 1971 .

[31]  J. Connolly,et al.  Event-Related Potential Components Reflect Phonological and Semantic Processing of the Terminal Word of Spoken Sentences , 1994, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[32]  A G Samuel,et al.  Knowing a Word Affects the Fundamental Perception of The Sounds Within it , 2001, Psychological science.

[33]  R M Warren,et al.  Perceptual restoration of obliterated sounds. , 1984, Psychological bulletin.

[34]  Kara D. Federmeier,et al.  Right words and left words: electrophysiological evidence for hemispheric differences in meaning processing. , 1999, Brain research. Cognitive brain research.

[35]  E. Plante,et al.  Time course of word identification and semantic integration in spoken language. , 1999, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[36]  C. Elberling,et al.  Auditory magnetic fields from the human cortex. Influence of stimulus intensity. , 1981, Scandinavian audiology.

[37]  T W Picton,et al.  Amplitude of evoked responses to tones of high intensity. , 1970, Acta oto-laryngologica.