The DOI matches its Crossref record; 17 of the 17 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Discrimination of non-native consonant contrasts varying in perceptual assimilation to the listener’s native phonological system
Open accessAbstract
Classic non-native speech perception findings suggested that adults have difficulty discriminating segmental distinctions that are not employed contrastively in their own language. However, recent reports indicate a gradient of performance across non-native contrasts, ranging from near-chance to near-ceiling. Current theoretical models argue that such variations reflect systematic effects of experience with phonetic properties of native speech. The present research addressed predictions from Best’s perceptual assimilation model (PAM), which incorporates both contrastive phonological and noncontrastive phonetic influences from the native language in its predictions about discrimination levels for diverse types of non-native contrasts. We evaluated the PAM hypotheses that discrimination of a non-native contrast should be near-ceiling if perceived as phonologically equivalent to a native contrast, lower though still quite good if perceived as a phonetic distinction between good versus poor exemplars of a single native consonant, and much lower if both non-native segments are phonetically equivalent in goodness of fit to a single native consonant. Two experiments assessed native English speakers’ perception of Zulu and Tigrinya contrasts expected to fit those criteria. Findings supported the PAM predictions, and provided evidence for some perceptual differentiation of phonological, phonetic, and nonlinguistic information in perception of non-native speech. Theoretical implications for non-native speech perception are discussed, and suggestions are made for further research.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Perception of the speech code.
Liberman, A. M., Cooper, F. S., Shankweiler, D. P., & Studdert-Kennedy, M. (1967) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/h0020279 · Cited by 3,722
Kuhl, P. K. (1991) · Perception & Psychophysics · doi:10.3758/bf03212211 · Cited by 1,331
Training Japanese listeners to identify English /r/ and /l/: A first report
Logan, J. S., Lively, S. E., & Pisoni, D. B. (1991) · The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · doi:10.1121/1.1894649 · Cited by 913
Lively, S. E., Logan, J. S., & Pisoni, D. B. (1993) · The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · doi:10.1121/1.408177 · Cited by 788
Miyawaki, K., Jenkins, J. J., Strange, W., Liberman, A. M., Verbrugge, R., & Fujimura, O. (1975) · Perception & Psychophysics · doi:10.3758/bf03211209 · Cited by 689
Auditory perception by normal Japanese adults of the sounds “L” and “R”
Goto, H. (1971) · Neuropsychologia · doi:10.1016/0028-3932(71)90027-3 · Cited by 620
Cross-language speech perception: Initial capabilities and developmental change.
Werker, J. F., & Lalonde, C. E. (1988) · Developmental Psychology · doi:10.1037/0012-1649.24.5.672 · Cited by 607
Developmental Aspects of Cross-Language Speech Perception
Werker, J. F., Gilbert, J. H. V., Humphrey, K., & Tees, R. C. (1981) · Child Development · doi:10.2307/1129249 · Cited by 553 · cited 6×
“Moreover, Englishlearning infants fail to show a developmental decline in discrimination of the clicks by 10–12 months (Best et al., 1988) comparable to that found for other non-native consonant contrasts (e.g., Werker, 1989; Werker and Pegg, 1992; Werker et al., 1981; Werker and Lalonde, 1988).”
BackgroundResultInfluentialCross-language evidence for three factors in speech perception
Werker, J. F., & Logan, J. S. (1985) · Perception & Psychophysics · doi:10.3758/bf03207136 · Cited by 376
Tees, R. C., & Werker, J. F. (1984) · Canadian Journal of Psychology / Revue canadienne de psychologie · doi:10.1037/h0080868 · Cited by 214
Cited by
Kuhl, P. K., Conboy, B. T., Coffey-Corina, S., Padden, D., Rivera-Gaxiola, M., & Nelson, T. (2008) · Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rstb.2007.2154 · Cited by 886
Infants show a facilitation effect for native language phonetic perception between 6 and 12 months
Kuhl, P. K., Stevens, E., Hayashi, A., Deguchi, T., Kiritani, S., & Iverson, P. (2006) · Developmental Science · doi:10.1111/j.1467-7687.2006.00468.x · Cited by 867
BRIDGING THE GAP BETWEEN L2 SPEECH PERCEPTION RESEARCH AND PHONOLOGICAL THEORY
Escudero, P., & Boersma, P. (2004) · Studies in Second Language Acquisition · doi:10.1017/s0272263104040021 · Cited by 459
Statistical phonetic learning in infants: facilitation and feature generalization
Maye, J., Weiss, D. J., & Aslin, R. N. (2008) · Developmental Science · doi:10.1111/j.1467-7687.2007.00653.x · Cited by 376
Persistent stress ‘deafness’: The case of French learners of Spanish
Dupoux, E., Sebastián-Gallés, N., Navarrete, E., & Peperkamp, S. (2008) · Cognition · doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2007.04.001 · Cited by 342
Metadata
- Authors
- Best, C. T., McRoberts, G. W., & Goodell, E.
- Venue
- The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America
- Publisher
- Acoustical Society of America (ASA)
- Published
- 2001-02-01
- Volume
- 109
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 775-794
- ISSN
- 0001-4966 (ISSN-L)
- 1520-8524
- OpenAlex
- W2020214791
- Cited by
- 684
- References
- 17
- FWCI
- 14.68
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Discrimination of non-native consonant contrasts varying in perceptual assimilation to the listener’s native phonological system. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1121/1.1332378
- The paper
- Best, C. T., McRoberts, G. W., & Goodell, E. (2001). Discrimination of non-native consonant contrasts varying in perceptual assimilation to the listener’s native phonological system. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.1332378
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
