The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
On the Possible Role of Brain Rhythms in Speech Perception: Intelligibility of Time-Compressed Speech with Periodic and Aperiodic Insertions of Silence
Abstract
This study was motivated by the prospective role played by brain rhythms in speech perception. The intelligibility – in terms of word error rate – of natural-sounding, synthetically generated sentences was measured using a paradigm that alters speech-energy rhythm over a range of frequencies. The material com-prised 96 semantically unpredictable sentences, each approximately 2 s long (6–8 words per sentence), generated by a high-quality text-to-speech (TTS) synthesis engine. The TTS waveform was time-compressed by a factor of 3, creating a signal with a syllable rhythm three times faster than the original, and whose intel-ligibility is poor (<50% words correct). A waveform with an artificial rhythm was produced by automatically segmenting the time-compressed waveform into consecutive 40-ms fragments, each followed by a silent interval. The parameters varied were the length of the silent interval (0–160 ms) and whether the lengths of silence were equal (‘periodic’) or not (‘aperiodic’). The performance curve (word error rate as a function of mean duration of silence) was U-shaped. The lowest word error rate (i.e., highest intelligibility) occurred when the silence was 80 ms long and inserted periodically. This is also the condition for which word error rate increased when the silence was inserted aperiodically. These data are consistent with a model (TEMPO) in which low-frequency brain rhythms affect the ability to decode the speech signal. In TEMPO, optimum intelligibility is achieved when the syllable rhythm is within the range of the high theta-frequency brain rhythms (6–12 Hz), comparable to the rate at which segments and syllables are articulated in conversational speech.
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
Buzsáki, G. (2006) · doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195301069.001.0001 · Cited by 4,873
von Stein, A., & Sarnthein, J. (2000) · International Journal of Psychophysiology · doi:10.1016/s0167-8760(00)00172-0 · Cited by 1,553
Pulvermüller, F. (1999) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x9900182x · Cited by 1,284
Cited by
Cortical oscillations and sensory predictions
Arnal, L. H., & Giraud, A.-L. (2012) · Trends in Cognitive Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.tics.2012.05.003 · Cited by 1,114
Why would Musical Training Benefit the Neural Encoding of Speech? The OPERA Hypothesis
Patel, A. D. (2011) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00142 · Cited by 703
Temporal scaling of neural responses to compressed and dilated natural speech
Lerner, Y., Honey, C. J., Katkov, M., & Hasson, U. (2014) · Journal of Neurophysiology · doi:10.1152/jn.00497.2013 · Cited by 75
Metadata
- Authors
- Ghitza, O., & Greenberg, S.
- Venue
- Phonetica
- Publisher
- Walter de Gruyter GmbH
- Published
- 2009-04-01
- Volume
- 66
- Issue
- 1-2
- Pages
- 113-126
- ISSN
- 0031-8388 (ISSN-L)
- 1423-0321
- OpenAlex
- W2083315447
- Cited by
- 298
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 9.24
- 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: On the Possible Role of Brain Rhythms in Speech Perception: Intelligibility of Time-Compressed Speech with Periodic and Aperiodic Insertions of Silence. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1159/000208934
- The paper
- Ghitza, O., & Greenberg, S. (2009). On the Possible Role of Brain Rhythms in Speech Perception: Intelligibility of Time-Compressed Speech with Periodic and Aperiodic Insertions of Silence. Phonetica. https://doi.org/10.1159/000208934
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.