Cited by 800Phonetics and Phonology ResearchNeuroscience and Music PerceptionTactile and Sensory Interactions

Speech perception without traditional speech cues

Remez, Robert E., Rubin, Philip E., Pisoni, David B., Carrell, Thomas D.·1981·Science

Abstract

A three-tone sinusoidal replica of a naturally produced utterance was identified by listeners, despite the readily apparent unnatural speech quality of the signal. The time-varying properties of these highly artificial acoustic signals are apparently sufficient to support perception of the linguistic message in the absence of traditional acoustic cues for phonetic segments.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1126/science.7233191

Cites

13 of 13 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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?

  • Any perceptual task where a hint can disambiguate the stimulus will generate examples of the conjunction fallacy.

    “any perceptual task where a hint can disambiguate the stimulus (e.g., sine-wave speech [67]) will generate examples of the conjunction fallacy.”

    From Bayesian Brains without Probabilities (2016) · cites this paper as [67]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Remez, R. E., Rubin, P. E., Pisoni, D. B., & Carrell, T. D.
Affiliations
  • Columbia University (US)
  • Haskins Laboratories (US)
  • Indiana University Bloomington (US)
Venue
Science
Published
1981-05-22
Volume
212
Issue
4497
Pages
947-950
ISSN
  • 0036-8075 (ISSN-L)
  • 1095-9203
OpenAlex
W2070230103
Cited by
800
References
13
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 32 · 2023: 45 · 2022: 18 · 2021: 26 · 2020: 30 · 2019: 17 · 2018: 40 · 2017: 21 · 2016: 38 · 2015: 33 · 2014: 31 · 2013: 28 · 2012: 25
FWCI
9.29
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Science (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Phonetics and Phonology Research
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Music Perception
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Tactile and Sensory Interactions
Keywords
speech perception, speech cues, phonetic segmentation
MeSH terms
Auditory Perception, Humans, Phonetics, 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