Dimension‐Based Statistical Learning Affects Both Speech Perception and Production
Open accessAbstract
Multiple acoustic dimensions signal speech categories. However, dimensions vary in their informativeness; some are more diagnostic of category membership than others. Speech categorization reflects these dimensional regularities such that diagnostic dimensions carry more “perceptual weight” and more effectively signal category membership to native listeners. Yet perceptual weights are malleable. When short‐term experience deviates from long‐term language norms, such as in a foreign accent, the perceptual weight of acoustic dimensions in signaling speech category membership rapidly adjusts. The present study investigated whether rapid adjustments in listeners’ perceptual weights in response to speech that deviates from the norms also affects listeners’ own speech productions. In a word recognition task, the correlation between two acoustic dimensions signaling consonant categories, fundamental frequency (F 0) and voice onset time (VOT), matched the correlation typical of English, and then shifted to an “artificial accent” that reversed the relationship, and then shifted back. Brief, incidental exposure to the artificial accent caused participants to down‐weight perceptual reliance on F 0, consistent with previous research. Throughout the task, participants were intermittently prompted with pictures to produce these same words. In the block in which listeners heard the artificial accent with a reversed F 0 × VOT correlation, F 0 was a less robust cue to voicing in listeners’ own speech productions. The statistical regularities of short‐term speech input affect both speech perception and production, as evidenced via shifts in how acoustic dimensions are weighted.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
Control Methods Used in a Study of the Vowels
Peterson, G. E., & Barney, H. L. (1952) · The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · doi:10.1121/1.1906875 · Cited by 2,837 · cited 1× · see citing works
“F0 varies substantially across gender (e.g., Peterson & Barney, 1952), so we also analyzed F0 as a function of voiced and voiceless consonants separately for male and female participants.”
BackgroundComputational neuroanatomy of speech production
Hickok, G. (2012) · Nature Reviews Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/nrn3158 · Cited by 837 · see citing works
Speech recognition in adverse conditions: A review.
Mattys, S. L., Davis, M. H., Bradlow, A. R., & Scott, S. K. (2012) · Language and Cognitive Processes · doi:10.1080/01690965.2012.705006 · Cited by 809 · see citing works
Uncovering the role of gender stereotypes in speech perception
Strand, E. A. (1999) · Journal of Language and Social Psychology · doi:10.1177/0261927x99018001006 · Cited by 388 · see citing works
Yamada, R. A., & Tohkura, Y. (1992) · Perception & Psychophysics · doi:10.3758/bf03206698 · Cited by 161 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
- Authors
- Lehet, M., & Holt, L. L.
- Affiliations
- Center for the Neural Basis of Cognition (US)
- Corresponding author
- Lehet, Matthew
- Venue
- Cognitive Science
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2016-09-25
- Volume
- 41
- Issue
- S4
- Pages
- 885-912
- ISSN
- 0364-0213 (ISSN-L)
- 1551-6709
- PMC
- PMC5366099
- OpenAlex
- W2523066912
- Cited by
- 28
- References
- 5
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 5 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 1
- FWCI
- 1.68
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- Locations
- Cognitive Science (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institutes of Health (R01DC004674, T90DA022761, T32GM081760)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Phonetics and Phonology Research
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Categorization, perception, and language
- Social Sciences › Linguistics and Language › Linguistic Variation and Morphology
- Keywords
- statistical learning, speech perception, speech production, perceptual weights, fundamental frequency, voice onset time, foreign accent, voicing, word recognition, incidental exposure
- MeSH terms
- Female, Humans, Language, Male, Phonetics, Probability Learning, Speech, Speech Perception, Comprehension
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