Abstract
The extent to which decreased comprehension of time-compressed messages results from decreased word intelligibility was investigated. Experiment 1, in which 500-word messages were temporally interrupted, demonstrated that when 60% of the signal is deleted, comprehension is reduced even without the temporal limitations of compression. Experiment 2, which employed a backward masking procedure, demonstrated that individually compressed words are less intelligible when presented within the limited time constraints of a compressed message. It was concluded that decreased comprehension of compressed messages is the result of decreased word intelligibility.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
De Haas, H. J. (1977). A speech-rate intelligibility threshold for speeded and time-compressed connected speech.Perception & Psychophysics,22, 366–372.
De Haas, H. J. (1982). The relationship of estimated comprehensibility to the rate of connected speech.Perception & Psychophysics,32, 27–31.
Fairbanks, G., Guttman, N., &Miron, M. S. (1957). Auditory comprehension of repeated high speed messages.Journal of Speech & Hearing Disorders,22, 20–22.
Fodor, J. A., Bever, T. G., &Garrett, M. F. (1974).The psychology of language: An introduction to psycholinguistics and generative grammar. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Foulke, E. (1968). Listening comprehension as a function of word rate.Journal of Communication,18, 198–206.
Foulke, E., Amster, C. H., Nolan, C. Y., &Bixler, R. H. (1962). The comprehension of rapid speech by the blind.Exceptional Children,29, 134–141.
Foulke, E., &Sticht, T. G. (1967). The intelligibility and comprehension of time compressed speech. In E. Foulke (Ed.),Proceedings of the Louisville Conference on Time Compressed Speech, October 19–21, 1966 (pp. 21–28). Louisville, KY: University of Louisville, Center for Rate Controlled Recordings (Perceptual Alternatives Laboratory).
Foulke, E., &Sticht, T. G. (1969). Review of research on the intelligibility and comprehension of accelerated speech.Psychological Bulletin,72, 50–62.
Garvey, W. D. (1953). The intelhgibility of speeded speech.Journal of Experimental Psychology,45, 102–108.
Kozhevnikov, V. A., &Chistovich, L. A. (1966).Speech: Articulation and perception (Trans. No. JPRS 30, 543, 1965). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Commerce, Joint Publications Research Service.
Linton, M., &Gallo, P. S. (1975).The practical statistician: Simplified handbook of statistics. California: Wadsworth.
Miller, G. A. (1981).Language andspeech. San Francisco: W. H. Freeman.
Miller, G. A., &Licklider, J. C. (1950). The intelligibility of interrupted speech.Journal of the Acoustical Society of America,22, 167–173.
Reicher, G. M. (1969). Perceptual recognition as a function of meaningfulness of stimuli material.Journal of Experimental Psychology,81, 275–280.
Tulving, E., &Gold, C. (1963). Stimulus information and contextual information as determinants of tachistoscopic recognition of words.Journal of Experimental Psychology,66, 319–327.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Heiman, G.W., Leo, R.J., Leighbody, G. et al. Word intelligibility decrements and the comprehension of time-compressed speech. Perception & Psychophysics 40, 407–411 (1986). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03208200
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03208200