Advertisement

Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics

, Volume 81, Issue 2, pp 543–557 | Cite as

Reassessing the electrophysiological evidence for categorical perception of Mandarin lexical tone: ERP evidence from native and naïve non-native Mandarin listeners

  • Yang Agnes GaoEmail author
  • Joseph C. Toscano
  • Chilin Shih
  • Darren Tanner
Article
  • 84 Downloads

Abstract

Some studies have argued that native speakers of tonal languages have been shown to perceive lexical tone continua in a more categorical manner than speakers of non-tonal languages. Among these, Zhang and colleagues (NeuroReport 23 (1): 35-9) conducted an event-related potential (ERP) study using an oddball paradigm showing that native Mandarin speakers exhibit different sensitivity to deviant tones that cross category boundaries compared to deviants that belong to the same category as the standard. Other recent ERP findings examining consonant voicing categories question whether perception is truly categorical. The current study investigated these discrepant findings by replicating and extending the Zhang et al. study. Native Mandarin speakers and naïve English speakers performed an auditory oddball detection test while ERPs were recorded. Naïve English speakers were included to test for language experience effects. We found that Mandarin speakers and English speakers demonstrated qualitatively similar responses, in that both groups showed a larger N2 to the across-category deviant and a larger P3 to the within-category deviant. The N2/P3 pattern also did not differ in scalp topography for the within- versus across-category deviants, as was reported by Zhang et al. Cross-language differences surfaced in behavioral results, where Mandarin speakers showed better discrimination for the across-category deviant, but English speakers showed better discrimination for within-category deviants, though all results were near-ceiling. Our results therefore support models suggesting that listeners remain sensitive to gradient acoustic differences in speech even when they have learned phonological categories along an acoustic dimension.

Keywords

Categorical perception Mandarin Lexical tones ERP N2 P3 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank Jessica Philipp, Justin Brook, and Amanda Kim for assistance with data collection. We would also like to thank Jerome Packard for helpful discussion in the early stages of this project. This project was part of Yang Agnes Gao’s undergraduate honors thesis in the Department of Linguistics at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. This work was partially supported by NSF BCS-1431324 to DT.

References

  1. Acunzo, D. J., MacKenzie, G., & van Rossum, M. C. W. (2012). Systematic biases in early ERP and ERF components as a result of high-pass filtering. Journal of Neuroscience Methods, 209, 212–218.Google Scholar
  2. Dehaene-Lambertz, G. (1997). Electrophysiological correlates of categorical phoneme perception in adults. NeuroReport, 8(4), 919-924.Google Scholar
  3. Delorme, A., & Makeig, S. (2004). EEGLAB: an open source toolbox for analysis of single-trial EEG dynamics including independent component analysis. Journal of Neuroscience Methods, 134(1), 9-21.Google Scholar
  4. Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Lang, A., & Buchner, A. (2007). G*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 39, 175-191.Google Scholar
  5. Folstein, J. R., & Van Petten, C. (2008). Influence of cognitive control and mismatch on the N2 component of the ERP: a review. Psychophysiology, 45(1), 152-170.Google Scholar
  6. Gandour, J. T. (1978). The perception of tone. Tone: A Linguistic Survey, pp. 41-76.Google Scholar
  7. Holt, L. L., & Lotto, A. J. (2010). Speech perception as categorization. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 72(5), 1218-1227.Google Scholar
  8. Jasper, H. (1958). Report of the committee on methods of clinical examination in electroencephalography. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol, 10, 370-375.Google Scholar
  9. Joanisse, M. F., Robertson, E. K., & Newman, R. L. (2007). Mismatch negativity reflects sensory and phonetic speech processing. NeuroReport, 18(9), 901-905.Google Scholar
  10. Laken, D. (2013). Calculating and reporting effect sizes to facilitate cumulative science: A practical primer for t-tests and ANOVAs. Frontiers in Psychology, 4, 863.Google Scholar
  11. Lenth, R. V. (2016). Least-squares means: the R package lsmeans. J Stat Softw, 69(1), 1-33.Google Scholar
  12. Liberman, A. M., Delattre, P., & Cooper, F. S. (1952). The role of selected stimulus-variables in the perception of the unvoiced stop consonants. The American Journal of Psychology, 497-516.Google Scholar
  13. Liberman, A. M., Harris, K. S., Hoffman, H. S., & Griffith, B. C. (1957). The discrimination of speech sounds within and across phoneme boundaries. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 54(5), 358.Google Scholar
  14. Liberman, A. M., Cooper, F. S., Shankweiler, D. P., & Studdert-Kennedy, M. (1967). Perception of the speech code. Psychological Review, 74(6), 431.Google Scholar
  15. Lopez-Calderon, J., & Luck, S. J. (2014). ERPLAB: an open-source toolbox for the analysis of event-related potentials. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 8, 213.Google Scholar
  16. Luck, S. J. (2014). An Introduction to the Event-related Potential Technique. MIT press.Google Scholar
  17. Massaro, D.W., & Cohen, M.M. (1983). Categorical or continuous speech perception: A new test. Speech Communication, 2, 15–35Google Scholar
  18. McMurray, B., Tanenhaus, M. K., & Aslin, R. N. (2002). Gradient effects of within-category phonetic variation on lexical access. Cognition, 86(2), B33-B42.Google Scholar
  19. Miller, J. L. (1994). On the internal structure of phonetic categories: A progress report. Cognition, 50(1–3), 271–285.Google Scholar
  20. Näätänen, R. (2001). The perception of speech sounds by the human brain as reflected by the mismatch negativity (MMN) and its magnetic equivalent (MMNm). Psychophysiology, 38(1), 1-21.Google Scholar
  21. Peng, G., Zheng, H. Y., Gong, T., Yang, R. X., Kong, J. P., & Wang, W. S. Y. (2010). The influence of language experience on categorical perception of pitch contours. Journal of Phonetics, 38(4), 616-624.Google Scholar
  22. Phillips, C., Pellathy, T., Marantz, A., Yellin, E., Wexler, K., Poeppel, D., et al. (2000). Auditory cortex accesses phonological categories: An MEG mismatch study. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 12, 1038–1055.Google Scholar
  23. Repp, B. H., Healy, A. F., & Crowder, R. G. (1979). Categories and context in the perception of isolated steady-state vowels. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 5(1), 129.Google Scholar
  24. Sharma, A., Kraus, N., McGee, T., Carrell, T., & Nicol, T. (1993). Acoustic versus phonetic representation of speech as reflected by the mismatch negativity event-related potential. Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology, 88, 64–71.Google Scholar
  25. Toscano, J. C., McMurray, B., Dennhardt, J., & Luck, S. J. (2010). Continuous perception and graded categorization: electrophysiological evidence for a linear relationship between the acoustic signal and perceptual encoding of speech. Psychological Science, 21, 1532-40.Google Scholar
  26. Woldorff, M. G., Hackley, S. A., & Hillyard, S. A. (1991). The effects of channel-selective attention on the mismatch negativity wave elicited by deviant tones. Psychophysiology, 28(1), 30-42.Google Scholar
  27. Xi, J., Zhang, L., Shu, H., Zhang, Y., & Li, P. (2010). Categorical perception of lexical tones in Chinese revealed by mismatch negativity. Neuroscience, 170(1), 223-231.Google Scholar
  28. Xu, Y., Gandour, J. T., & Francis, A. L. (2006). Effects of language experience and stimulus complexity on the categorical perception of pitch direction. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 120(2), 1063-1074.Google Scholar
  29. Yip, M. (2002). Tone. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  30. Zentner, M. & Strauss, H. (2017). Assessing musical ability quickly and objectively: Development and validation of the Short-PROMS and the Mini-PROMS. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1440, 33-45.Google Scholar
  31. Zhang, L., Xi, J., Wu, H., Shu, H., & Li, P. (2012). Electrophysiological evidence of categorical perception of Chinese lexical tones in attentive condition. NeuroReport, 23(1), 35-9.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Psychonomic Society, Inc. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Yang Agnes Gao
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • Joseph C. Toscano
    • 2
  • Chilin Shih
    • 1
    • 3
    • 4
  • Darren Tanner
    • 1
    • 4
    • 5
  1. 1.Department of LinguisticsUniversity of Illinois at Urbana-ChampaignUrbana-ChampaignUSA
  2. 2.Department of Psychological and Brain SciencesVillanova UniversityVillanovaUSA
  3. 3.Department of East Asian Languages and CulturesUniversity of Illinois at Urbana-ChampaignUrbana-ChampaignUSA
  4. 4.Beckman Institute for Advanced Science and TechnologyUniversity of Illinois at Urbana-ChampaignUrbana-ChampaignUSA
  5. 5.Neuroscience ProgramUniversity of Illinois at Urbana-ChampaignUrbana-ChampaignUSA

Personalised recommendations