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

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

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
DOI 10.1037/0096-1523.8.2.297PMC PMC3495319
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

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.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/0096-1523.8.2.297

Cites

0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

The publisher hasn’t deposited this paper’s reference list.

Research works printed but not linked: 37

  1. Abramson AS, Lisker L. Proceedings of the 6th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences 1967. Academia; Prague: 1970. Discriminability along the voicing continuum: Cross language tests. [Google Scholar]
  2. Ades AE. Vowels, consonants, speech, and nonspeech. Psychological Review. 1977;84:524–530. [Google Scholar]
  3. Aslin RN, Pisoni DB. Some developmental processes in speech perception. In: Yeai-Komshian G, Kavanagh J, Ferguson CA, editors. Child phonology: Perception and production. Vol. 1. Academic Press; New York: 1980. [Google Scholar]
  4. Aslin RN, Pisoni DB, Hennessy B, Perey AJ. Discrimination of Voice-onset-time by human infants: New findings concerning phonetic development. Child Development. 1981;52:1135–1145. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Attneave F. Applications of information theory to psychology. Holt, Rinehart & Winston; New York: 1959. [Google Scholar]
  6. Blakemore C. Developmental factors in the formation of feature extracting neurons. In: Schmidt FO, Worden FG, editors. The neurosciences: Third study program. MIT Press; Cambridge, Mass.: 1974. [Google Scholar]
  7. Caramazza A, Yeni-Komshian GH, Zurif EB, Carbone E. The acquisition of a new phonological contrast: The case of stop consonants in French-English bilinguals. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America. 1973;54:421–428. doi: 10.1121/1.1913594. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  8. Cross DV, Lane HL. On the discriminative control of concurrent responses: The relations among response frequency, latency and topography in auditory generalization. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior. 1962;5:487–496. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1962.5-487. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  9. Daniels JD, Pettigrew JD. Development of neuronal response in the visual system of cats. In: Gottlieb G, editor. Neural and behavioral specificity: Studies on the development of behavior and the nervous system. Vol. 3. Academic Press; New York: 1976. [Google Scholar]
  10. Durlach NI, Braida LD. Intensity perception: I. Preliminary theory of intensity resolution. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America. 1969;46:372–383. doi: 10.1121/1.1911699. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  11. Edman TR, Soli SD, Widin GP. Learning and generalization of intra-phonemic VOT discrimination. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America. 1978;63:SI, 19. [Google Scholar]
  12. Eimas PD. Auditory and phonetic coding of the cues for speech: Discrimination of the [r-1] distinction by young infants. Perception & Psychophysics. 1975;18:341–347. [Google Scholar]
  13. Eimas PD. Developmental aspects of speech perception. In: Held R, Leibowitz H, Teuber HL, editors. Handbook of sensory physiology: VIII. Perception. Springer-Verlag; New York: 1978. [Google Scholar]
  14. Eimas PD, Tartter VC. On the development of speech perception: Mechanisms and analogies. In: Lipsitt L, Reese H, editors. Advances in child development and behavior. Vol. 13. Academic Press; New York: 1979. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Klatt DH. Software for a cascade/parallel formant synthesizer. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America. 1980;67:971–995. [Google Scholar]
  16. Lane HL. The motor theory of speech perception: A critical review. Psychological Review. 1965;72:275–309. doi: 10.1037/h0021986. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  17. Lane HL, Moore DJ. Reconditioning a consonant discrimination in an aphasic: An experimental case history. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders. 1962;27:232–243. doi: 10.1044/jshd.2703.232. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  18. Lisker L. Status Report on Speech Research (SR-24) Haskins Laboratories; New Haven, Conn: 1970. On learning a new contrast. [Google Scholar]
  19. Lisker L. Status Report on Speech Research SR-24. Haskins Laboratories; New Haven, Conn: 1970. On learning a new contrast. [Google Scholar]
  20. Lisker L, Abramson AS. The voicing dimension: Some experiments in comparative phonetics. Proceedings of the 6th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences; Prague: Academia; 1967. [Google Scholar]
  21. Miller JD, Wier CC, Pastore R, Kelly WJ, Dooling RJ. Discrimination and labelling of noise-buzz sequences with varying noise-lead times: An example of categorical perception. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America. 1916;60:410–417. doi: 10.1121/1.381097. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  22. McClasky CL, Pisoni DB, Carrell TD. Research on Speech Perception Progress Report No. 6. Indiana University; Bloomington: 1980. Effects of transfer of training on identification of a new linguistic contrast in voicing. [Google Scholar]
  23. Pisoni DB. Status Report on Speech Research SR--27. Haskins Laboratories; New Haven, Conn.: 1971. On the nature of categorical perception of speech sounds. Supplement. [Google Scholar]
  24. Pisoni DB. Auditory short-term memory and vowel perception. Memory & Cognition. 1975;3:7–18. doi: 10.3758/BF03198202. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  25. Pisoni DB. Research on Speech Perception Progress Report No. 3. Indiana University; Bloomington: 1976. Some effects of discrimination training on the identification and discrimination of rapid spectral changes. [Google Scholar]
  26. Pisoni DB. Identification and discrimination of the relative onset of two component tones: Implications for voicing perception in stops. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America. 1977;67:1352–1361. doi: 10.1121/1.381409. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  27. Pisoni DB. Perception of speech vs. nonspeech: Evidence for different modes of processing. Proceedings of the Ninth International Congress of Phonetic Sciences; Copenhagen: Institute of Phonetics, University of Copenhagen; 1979. [Google Scholar]
  28. Pisoni DB, Lazarus JH. Categorical and non-categorical modes of speech perception along the voicing continuum. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America. 1974;55:328–333. doi: 10.1121/1.1914506. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI · Paper page
  29. Pisoni DB, Tash JB. Reaction times to comparisons within and across phonetic categories. Perception & Psychophysics. 1974;15:285–290. doi: 10.3758/bf03213946. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI · Paper page
  30. Remez RE. Adaptation of the category boundary between speech and nonspeech: A case against feature detectors. Cognitive Psychology. 1979;11:38–57. doi: 10.1016/0010-0285(79)90003-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  31. Stevens KN. The quantal nature of speech: Evidence from articulatory-acoustic data. In: David EE Jr., Denes PB, editors. Human communication: A unified view. McGraw-Hill; New York: 1972. [Google Scholar]
  32. Strange W. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Minnesota; 1972. The effects of training on the perception of synthetic speech sounds: Voice onset time. [Google Scholar]
  33. Strange W, Jenkins JJ. Role of linguistic experience in the perception of speech. In: Walk RD, Pick HL, editors. Perception and experience. Plenum Press; New York: 1978. [Google Scholar]
  34. Streeter LA. Kikuyu labial and apical stop discrimination. Journal of Phonetics. 1976;4:43–49. a. [Google Scholar]
  35. Streeter LA, Landauer TK. Effects of learning English as a second language on the acquisition of a new phonemic contrast. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America. 1976;59:448–451. doi: 10.1121/1.380864. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  36. Walker HM, Lev J. Statistical inference. Holt; New York: 1953. [Google Scholar]
  37. Woodworth RS. Experimental psychology. Holt; New York: 1938. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Pisoni, D. B., Aslin, R. N., Perey, A. J., & Hennessy, B. L.
Affiliations
Indiana University Bloomington (US)
ORCID
Pisoni, David B.
Venue
Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance
Publisher
American Psychological Association (APA)
Published
1982
Volume
8
Issue
2
Pages
297-314
ISSN
  • 0096-1523 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-1277
DOI
10.1037/0096-1523.8.2.297
PMC
PMC3495319
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
Update notices
correction (2006-03-29)
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