Perceptuo-motor effects of response-distractor compatibility in speech: beyond phonemic identity
- 201 Downloads
Previous studies have found faster response times in a production task when a speaker perceives a distractor syllable that is identical to the syllable they are required to produce. No study has found such effects when a response and a distractor are not identical but share parameters below the level of the phoneme. Results from Experiment 1 show some evidence of a response-time effect of response-distractor voicing congruency. Experiment 2 showed a robust effect of articulator congruency: perceiving a distractor that has the same articulatory organ as that implicated in the planned motor response speeds up response times. These results necessitate a more direct and specific formulation of the perception-production link than warranted by previous experimental evidence. Implications for theories of speech production are also discussed.
KeywordsSpeech perception Speech production Motor planning/programming Psycholinguistics
This research was supported by NSF Grant 0951831 to KDR, and by ERC AdG 249440 to AIG.
- Fowler, C. A. (1986). An event approach to the study of speech perception from a direct-realist perspective. Journal of Phonetics, 14, 3–28.Google Scholar
- Gelman, A., & Hill, J. (2007). Data analysis using regression and multilevel/hierarchical models. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- Nielsen, K. Y. (2007). Implicit phonetic imitation is constrained by phonemic contrast. In J. Trouvain & W. J. Barry (Eds.), Proceedings of the 16th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences (pp. 1961–1964). Germany: Saarbrücken.Google Scholar
- Roon, K. D., & Gafos, A. I. (2013). A dynamical model of the speech perception-production link. In M. Knauff, M. Pauen, N. Sebanz & I. Wachsmuth (eds.), 35th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (1241–1246). Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society.Google Scholar
- Viviani, P. (2002). Motor competence in the perception of dynamic events: A tutorial. In W. Prinz & B. Hommel (Eds.), Common mechanisms in perception and action: Attention and performance XIX (pp. 406–442). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar