The DOI matches its Crossref record; 31 of the 31 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Phonetic training with acoustic cue manipulations: A comparison of methods for teaching English /r/-/l/ to Japanese adults
Abstract
Recent work [Iverson et al. (2003) Cognition, 87, B47–57] has suggested that Japanese adults have difficulty learning English /r/ and /l/ because they are overly sensitive to acoustic cues that are not reliable for /r/-/l/ categorization (e.g., F2 frequency). This study investigated whether cue weightings are altered by auditory training, and compared the effectiveness of different training techniques. Separate groups of subjects received High Variability Phonetic Training (natural words from multiple talkers), and 3 techniques in which the natural recordings were altered via signal processing (All Enhancement, with F3 contrast maximized and closure duration lengthened; Perceptual Fading, with F3 enhancement reduced during training; and Secondary Cue Variability, with variation in F2 and durations increased during training). The results demonstrated that all of the training techniques improved /r/-/l/ identification by Japanese listeners, but there were no differences between the techniques. Training also altered the use of secondary acoustic cues; listeners became biased to identify stimuli as English /l/ when the cues made them similar to the Japanese /r/ category, and reduced their use of secondary acoustic cues for stimuli that were dissimilar to Japanese /r/. The results suggest that both category assimilation and perceptual interference affect English /r/ and /l/ acquisition.
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
Attention, similarity, and the identification-categorization relationship.
Nosofsky, R. M. (1986) · Journal of Experimental Psychology General · doi:10.1037//0096-3445.115.1.39 · Cited by 2,766
A "Rationalized" Arcsine Transform
Studebaker, G. A. (1985) · Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research · doi:10.1044/jshr.2803.455 · Cited by 1,479
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
A new view of language acquisition
Kuhl, P. K. (2000) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.97.22.11850 · Cited by 773
Miyawaki, K., Jenkins, J. J., Strange, W., Liberman, A. M., Verbrugge, R., & Fujimura, O. (1975) · Perception & Psychophysics · doi:10.3758/bf03211209 · Cited by 689
Best, C. T., McRoberts, G. W., & Goodell, E. (2001) · The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · doi:10.1121/1.1332378 · Cited by 684
Best, C. T., McRoberts, G. W., & Sithole, N. M. (1988) · Journal of Experimental Psychology Human Perception & Performance · doi:10.1037//0096-1523.14.3.345 · Cited by 653
A perceptual interference account of acquisition difficulties for non-native phonemes
Iverson, P., Kuhl, P. K., Akahane-Yamada, R., Diesch, E., Tohkura, Y., Kettermann, A., & Siebert, C. (2003) · Cognition · doi:10.1016/s0010-0277(02)00198-1 · Cited by 647
Self-citationAuditory 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
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
Pronunciation Fundamentals: Evidence-based perspectives for L2 teaching and research
Derwing, T. M., & Munro, M. J. (2015) · Language Learning & Language Teaching · doi:10.1075/lllt.42 · Cited by 656
The Revised Speech Learning Model (SLM-r)
Flege, J. E., & Bohn, O.-S. (2021) · Second Language Speech Learning · doi:10.1017/9781108886901.002 · Cited by 429
Cue weighting in auditory categorization: Implications for first and second language acquisition
Holt, L. L., & Lotto, A. J. (2006) · The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · doi:10.1121/1.2188377 · Cited by 335
Saito, K., & Plonsky, L. (2019) · Language Learning · doi:10.1111/lang.12345 · Cited by 282
Metadata
- Authors
- Iverson, P., Hazan, V., & Bannister, K.
- Venue
- The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America
- Publisher
- Acoustical Society of America (ASA)
- Published
- 2005-11-01
- Volume
- 118
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 3267-3278
- ISSN
- 0001-4966 (ISSN-L)
- 1520-8524
- OpenAlex
- W2095459173
- Cited by
- 277
- References
- 31
- FWCI
- 5.83
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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: Phonetic training with acoustic cue manipulations: A comparison of methods for teaching English /r/-/l/ to Japanese adults. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1121/1.2062307
- The paper
- Iverson, P., Hazan, V., & Bannister, K. (2005). Phonetic training with acoustic cue manipulations: A comparison of methods for teaching English /r/-/l/ to Japanese adults. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.2062307
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.
