Cited by 17
The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Listener sensitivity to probabilistic conditioning of sociolinguistic variables: The case of (ING)
Vaughn, Charlotte, Kendall, Tyler·2018·Journal of Memory and Language
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Crossref · 10.1016/j.jml.2018.07.006
Cites
3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable
Statistics
Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.
Verification
Claims the paper makes
We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“Listeners show an awareness of this distribution across part-of-speech categories when categorizing tokens of variable (ING).”
From Swear(ING) ain't play(ING): The interaction of taboo language and the sociolinguistic variable (2023) · cites this paper as Vaughn & Kendall, 2018
In the citing paper
“The results suggest that listeners made use of bottom-up information from the rest of the word when identifying variable (ING) tokens (Vaughn & Kendall, 2018).”
From Swear(ING) ain't play(ING): The interaction of taboo language and the sociolinguistic variable (2023) · cites this paper as Vaughn & Kendall, 2018
In the citing paper
“An overall bias for the velar variant was also found by Vaughn and Kendall (2018).”
From Swear(ING) ain't play(ING): The interaction of taboo language and the sociolinguistic variable (2023) · cites this paper as Vaughn and Kendall (2018)
In the citing paper
“Presenting words in isolation also removes potentially relevant information that might guide listener expectation, such as syntactic category (Vaughn & Kendall, 2018).”
From Swear(ING) ain't play(ING): The interaction of taboo language and the sociolinguistic variable (2023) · cites this paper as Vaughn & Kendall, 2018
Citations
Cites
Whatever next? Predictive brains, situated agents, and the future of cognitive science
Clark, A. (2013) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x12000477 · Cited by 5,924
Four central questions about prediction in language processing
Huettig, F. (2015) · Brain Research · doi:10.1016/j.brainres.2015.02.014 · Cited by 405
A computational analysis of uniqueness points in auditory word recognition
Luce, P. A. (1986) · Perception & Psychophysics · doi:10.3758/bf03212485 · Cited by 206
Research works printed but not linked: 61
- Abramowicz, Ł. (2007). Sociolinguistics meets exemplar theory: Frequency and recency effects in (ing). University of Pennsylvania working papers in linguistics, 13(2), 3.
- Allen, 2004, Listener sensitivity to individual talker differences in voice-onset-time, Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 115, 3171, 10.1121/1.1701898 · DOI
- Allopenna, 1998, Tracking the time course of spoken word recognition using eye movements: Evidence for continuous mapping models, Journal of Memory and Language, 38, 419, 10.1006/jmla.1997.2558 · DOI
- Baayen, 2013, Sidestepping the combinatorial explosion: An explanation of n-gram frequency effects based on naive discriminative learning, Language and Speech, 56, 329, 10.1177/0023830913484896 · DOI
- Bender, 2005, On the boundaries of linguistic competence: Matched-guise experiments as evidence of knowledge of grammar, Lingua, 115, 1579, 10.1016/j.lingua.2004.07.005 · DOI
- Bresnahan, 2002, Attitudinal and affective response toward accented English, Language & Communication, 22, 171, 10.1016/S0271-5309(01)00025-8 · DOI
- Bresnan, 2010, Predicting syntax: Processing dative constructions in American and Australian varieties of English, Language, 86, 168, 10.1353/lan.0.0189 · DOI
- Brouwer, 2013, Discourse context and the recognition of reduced and canonical spoken words, Applied Psycholinguistics, 34, 519, 10.1017/S0142716411000853 · DOI
- Bürki, 2010, Is there only one “fenêtre” in the production lexicon? On-line evidence on the nature of phonological representations of pronunciation variants for French schwa words, Journal of Memory and Language, 62, 421, 10.1016/j.jml.2010.01.002 · DOI
- Campbell-Kibler, 2007, Accent, (ING), and the social logic of listener perceptions, American Speech, 82, 32, 10.1215/00031283-2007-002 · DOI
- Clayards, 2008, Perception of speech reflects optimal use of probabilistic speech cues, Cognition, 108, 804, 10.1016/j.cognition.2008.04.004 · DOI
- Connine, 2004, It’s not what you hear but how often you hear it: On the neglected role of phonological variant frequency in auditory word recognition, Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 11, 1084, 10.3758/BF03196741 · DOI
- Connine, 1987, Interactive use of lexical information in speech perception, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 13, 291
- Connine, 2008, Processing variant forms in spoken word recognition: The role of variant frequency, Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 70, 403, 10.3758/PP.70.3.403 · DOI
- Davis, 2007, Hearing speech sounds: Top-down influences on the interface between audition and speech perception, Hearing Research, 229, 132, 10.1016/j.heares.2007.01.014 · DOI
- Docherty, 2013, Listener evaluation of sociophonetic variability: Probing constraints and capabilities, Linguistics, 51, 355, 10.1515/ling-2013-0014 · DOI
- Fine, 2013, Rapid expectation adaptation during syntactic comprehension, PLoS One, 8, e77661, 10.1371/journal.pone.0077661 · DOI
- Fischer, 1958, Social influences on the choice of a linguistic variant, Word-Journal of the International Linguistic Association, 14, 47
- Forrest, 2015, Community rules and speaker behavior: Individual adherence to group constraints on (ING), Language Variation and Change, 27, 377, 10.1017/S0954394515000137 · DOI
- Foulkes, 2015, The emergence of sociophonetic structure, The Handbook of Language Emergence, 292, 10.1002/9781118346136.ch13 · DOI
- Ganong, 1980, Phonetic categorization in auditory word perception, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 6, 110
- Garnsey, 1997, The contributions of verb bias and plausibility to the comprehension of temporarily ambiguous sentences, Journal of Memory and Language, 37, 58, 10.1006/jmla.1997.2512 · DOI
- Goldinger, 1996, Words and voices: Episodic traces in spoken word identification and recognition memory, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 22, 1166
- Goldinger, 2004, Episodic memory reflected in printed word naming, Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 11, 716, 10.3758/BF03196625 · DOI
- Hazen, 2008, (ING): A vernacular baseline for English in Appalachia, American Speech, 83, 116, 10.1215/00031283-2008-008 · DOI
- Hothorn, 2008, Simultaneous inference in general parametric models, Biometrical Journal, 50, 346, 10.1002/bimj.200810425 · DOI
- Houston, A. (1985). Continuity and change in English morphology: The variable (ING). Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Pennsylvania.
- Hura, 1992, On the role of perception in shaping phonological assimilation rules, Language and Speech, 35, 59, 10.1177/002383099203500206 · DOI
- Kleinschmidt, 2015, Robust speech perception: Recognize the familiar, generalize to the similar, and adapt to the novel, Psychological Review, 122, 148, 10.1037/a0038695 · DOI
- Kuperberg, 2016, What do we mean by prediction in language comprehension?, Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 31, 32, 10.1080/23273798.2015.1102299 · DOI · Paper page
- Kuznetsova, A., Brockhoff, P., & Christensen, R. (2014). LmerTest: Tests for random and fixed effects for linear mixed effect models. R package, version 2.0-3. · DOI
- Labov, 2011, Properties of the sociolinguistic monitor, Journal of Sociolinguistics, 15, 431, 10.1111/j.1467-9841.2011.00504.x · DOI
- Levon, 2014, Social salience and the sociolinguistic monitor: A case study of ing and th-fronting in Britain, Journal of English Linguistics, 42, 185, 10.1177/0075424214531487 · DOI
- Levy, 2008, Expectation-based syntactic comprehension, Cognition, 106, 1126, 10.1016/j.cognition.2007.05.006 · DOI
- Loudermilk, B. C. (2013). Cognitive mechanisms in the perception of sociolinguistic variation. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of California, Davis.
- Marslen-Wilson, 1989, Accessing spoken words: The importance of word onsets, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human perception and performance, 15, 576
- McAuliffe, 2016, Stimulus-directed attention attenuates lexically-guided perceptual learning, Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 140, 1727, 10.1121/1.4962529 · DOI
- McAuliffe, M., Socolof, M., Mihuc, S., Wagner, M., & Sonderegger, M. (2017). Montreal Forced Aligner: Trainable text-speech alignment using Kaldi. In Proceedings of Interspeech. · DOI
- McMurray, 2011, What information is necessary for speech categorization? Harnessing variability in the speech signal by integrating cues computed relative to expectations, Psychological Review, 118, 219, 10.1037/a0022325 · DOI
- McQueen, 2012, Changing only the probability that spoken words will be distorted changes how they are recognized, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 131, 509, 10.1121/1.3664087 · DOI
- Pierrehumbert, 2006, The next toolkit, Journal of Phonetics, 4, 516, 10.1016/j.wocn.2006.06.003 · DOI
- Pinnow, 2014, Phonological variant recognition: Representations and rules, Language and Speech, 57, 42, 10.1177/0023830913479105 · DOI
- Pitt, 2009, How are pronunciation variants of spoken words recognized? A test of generalization to newly learned words, Journal of Memory and Language, 61, 19, 10.1016/j.jml.2009.02.005 · DOI
- Pitt, 2011, Exploring the role of exposure frequency in recognizing pronunciation variants, Journal of Phonetics, 39, 304, 10.1016/j.wocn.2010.07.004 · DOI
- Pitt, 1993, An empirical and meta-analytic evaluation of the phoneme identification task, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 19, 699
- Rácz, 2017, Social salience discriminates learnability of contextual cues in an artificial language, Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 51, 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00051 · DOI
- Ranbom, 2007, Lexical representation of phonological variation in spoken word recognition, Journal of Memory and Language, 57, 273, 10.1016/j.jml.2007.04.001 · DOI
- Sumner, 2013, A phonetic explanation of pronunciation variant effects, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 134, EL26-EL32, 10.1121/1.4807432 · DOI
- Sumner, M., Kurumada, C., Gafter, R., & Casillas, M. (2013). Phonetic variation and the recognition of words with pronunciation variants. In The 35th annual meeting of the cognitive science society (pp. 3486–3492). Cognitive Science Society.
- Sumner, 2014, The socially weighted encoding of spoken words: A dual-route approach to speech perception, Frontiers in Psychology, 4, 1, 10.3389/fpsyg.2013.01015 · DOI
- Tamminga, 2017, Matched guise effects can be robust to speech style, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 142, EL18-EL23, 10.1121/1.4990399 · DOI · Paper page
- Theodore, 2015, Attention modulates specificity effects in spoken word recognition: Challenges to the time-course hypothesis, Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 77, 1674, 10.3758/s13414-015-0854-0 · DOI
- Theodore, 2015, Talker-specific influences on phonetic category structure, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 138, 1068, 10.1121/1.4927489 · DOI
- Traunmüller, 1990, Analytical expressions for the tonotopic sensory scale, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 88, 97, 10.1121/1.399849 · DOI
- Trueswell, 1993, Verb-specific constraints in sentence processing: Separating effects of lexical preference from garden-paths, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 19, 528
- Van Berkum, 2008, The neural integration of speaker and message, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 20, 580, 10.1162/jocn.2008.20054 · DOI
- Walker, 2011, Congruence between ‘word age’ and ‘voice age’ facilitates lexical access, Laboratory Phonology, 2, 219, 10.1515/labphon.2011.007 · DOI
- Warren, 1970, Perceptual restoration of missing speech sounds, Science, 167, 392, 10.1126/science.167.3917.392 · DOI
- Weiss, 2009, Speech segmentation in a simulated bilingual environment: A challenge for statistical learning?, Language Learning and Development, 5, 30, 10.1080/15475440802340101 · DOI
- Wild, 2012, Effortful listening: The processing of degraded speech depends critically on attention, Journal of Neuroscience, 32, 14010, 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.1528-12.2012 · DOI
- Zarcone, 2016, Salience and attention in surprisal-based accounts of language processing, Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 1
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Swear(ING) ain't play(ING): The interaction of taboo language and the sociolinguistic variable
Hunt, M., Cotter, C., Pearson, H., & Stockall, L. (2023) · Journal of Sociolinguistics · doi:10.1111/josl.12588 · Cited by 5
Metadata
- Authors
- Vaughn, C., & Kendall, T.
- ORCID
- Vaughn, Charlotte
- Venue
- Journal of Memory and Language
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2018-12
- Volume
- 103
- Pages
- 58-73
- ISSN
- 0749-596X
- Cited by
- 17
- References
- 3
- Language
- en
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
