Cited by 66Phonetics and Phonology ResearchLanguage Development and DisordersCategorization, perception, and language

Context effects in two-month-old infants' perception of labiodental/interdental fricative contrasts.

Levitt, Andrea, Jusczyk, Peter W., Murray, Janice, Carden, Guy·1988·Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance

Abstract

We investigated 2-month-old infants' perception of a subset of highly confusable English fricatives. In Experiment 1, infants discriminated modified natural tokens of the voiceless fricative pair [fa]/[oa] but only when the syllables included their frication noises. They also discriminated the voiced pair [va]/[oa] both with and without fricative noises. These results parallel those found with adults by Carden, Levitt, Jusczyk, and Walley (1981). In Experiment 2 [f] and [o] noises were appended to [a], and the same [f] noise was appended to the previously indiscriminable fricationless versions of [fa] and [oa]. Infants discriminated both pairs of stimuli, indicating that (a) the frication is a sufficient cue for [fa]/[oa] discrimination and that (b) it provides a context for discriminating the [f] and [o] formant transitions. We conclude that infants' perception of labiodental/interdental fricative contrasts show evidence of context effects similar to those observed with adults.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/0096-1523.14.3.361

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

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?

  • Evidence has shown that infants can make virtually all of the consonantal discriminations that have been tested, including /va/ from /sa/ and /va/ from /oa/.

    “Furthermore, evidence has shown that infants can make virtually all of the consonantal discriminations that have been tested (Kuhl, 1987), including Ivai from Isal (Eilers & Minifie, 1975; Eilers, Wilson, & Moore, 1977) and Ivai from loal (Levitt, Jusczyk, Murray, & Carden, 1988).”

    From The McGurk effect in infants (1997) · cites this paper as Levitt, Jusczyk, Murray, & Carden, 1988

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Levitt, A., Jusczyk, P. W., Murray, J., & Carden, G.
Affiliations
Wellesley College (US)
Venue
Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance
Published
1988
Volume
14
Issue
3
Pages
361-368
ISSN
  • 0096-1523 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-1277
OpenAlex
W4246654559
Cited by
66
References
0
Citations by year
2024: 3 · 2022: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 2 · 2016: 1 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 16 · 2012: 1
FWCI
1.05
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Experimental Psychology Human Perception & Performance (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • U.S. Public Health Service (05596)
  • National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NS 24655)
  • Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (HD-01994)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Phonetics and Phonology Research
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Language Development and Disorders
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Categorization, perception, and language
Keywords
context effects, infant perception, labiodental fricatives, interdental fricatives, speech perception, two-month-old infants, consonant perception
MeSH terms
Humans, Infant, Language Development, Phonetics, Speech Perception

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