Cited by 201Phonetics and Phonology ResearchCategorization, perception, and languageNeuroscience and Music Perception

Some effects of laboratory training on identification and discrimination of voicing contrasts in stop consonants.

Open access
Pisoni, David B., Aslin, Richard N., Perey, Alan J., Hennessy, Beth L.·1982·Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance

Abstract

For many years there has been a consensus that early linguistic experience exerts a profound and often permanent effect on the perceptual abilities underlying the identification and discrimination of stop consonants. It has also been concluded that selective modification of the perception of stop consonants cannot be accomplished easily and quickly in the laboratory with simple discrimination training techniques. In the present article we report the results of three experiments that examined the perception of a three-way voicing contrast by naive monolingual speakers of English. Laboratory training procedures were implemented with a small computer in a real-time environment to examine the perception of voiced, voiceless unaspirated, and voiceless aspirated stops differing in voice onset time. Three perceptual categories were present for most subjects after only a few minutes of exposure to the novel contrast. Subsequent perceptual tests revealed reliable and consistent labeling and categorical-like discrimination functions for all three voicing categories, even though one of the contrasts is not phonologically distinctive in English. The present results demonstrate that the perceptual mechanisms used by adults in categorizing stop consonants can be modified easily with simple laboratory techniques in a short period of time.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/0096-1523.8.2.297

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?

  • Our work suggests that it is more difficult, but still possible, to learn to differentiate nonnative place of articulation distinctions.

    “Our work suggests that this is more difficult, but still possible, in the case of nonnative place of articulation distinctions.”

    From Cross-language evidence for three factors in speech perception (1985) · cites this paper as Pisoni, Aslin, Perey, and Hennessy's (1982)

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Pisoni, D. B., Aslin, R. N., Perey, A. J., & Hennessy, B. L.
Affiliations
Indiana University Bloomington (US)
Venue
Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance
Published
1982
Volume
8
Issue
2
Pages
297-314
ISSN
  • 0096-1523 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-1277
OpenAlex
W1993119641
Cited by
201
References
0
Citations by year
2025: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 22 · 2012: 5
FWCI
4.08
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Experimental Psychology Human Perception & Performance (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • Massachusetts Institute of Technology
  • National Institutes of Health (5r01dc000111-38)
  • National Institute of Mental Health
  • National Institute of Child Health and Human Development
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Phonetics and Phonology Research
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Categorization, perception, and language
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Music Perception
Keywords
voicing contrast, stop consonants, voice onset time, perceptual learning, discrimination training, categorical perception, phonetic categories, English speakers, aspirated stops, voiceless stops
MeSH terms
Adult, Feedback, Female, Humans, Male, Phonetics, Speech Discrimination Tests, 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