PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Tanya Kraljic

Publications and source records attributed to Tanya Kraljic.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

Generalization in perceptual learning for speech.

Lexical context strongly influences listeners' identification of ambiguous sounds. For example, a sound midway between /f/ and /s/ is reported as /f/ in "sheri_," but as /s/ in "Pari_." Norris, McQueen, and Cutler (2003) have demonstrated that after hearing such lexically determined phonemes, listeners expand their phonemic categories to include more ambiguous tokens than before. We tested whether listeners adjust their phonemic categories for a specific speaker. Do listeners learn a particular speaker's "accent"? Similarly, we examined whether perceptual learning is specific to the particular ambiguous phonemes that listeners hear, or whether the adjustments generalize to related sounds. Participants heard ambiguous /d/ or /t/ phonemes during a lexical decision task. They then categorized sounds on /d/-/t/ and /b/-/p/ continua, either in the same voice that they had heard for lexical decision, or in a different voice. Perceptual learning generalized across both speaker and test continua: Changes in perceptual representations are robust and broadly tuned.

Decision Making↗

Prosodic disambiguation of syntactic structure: for the speaker or for the addressee?

Evidence has been mixed on whether speakers spontaneously and reliably produce prosodic cues that resolve syntactic ambiguities. And when speakers do produce such cues, it is unclear whether they do so "for" their addressees (the audience design hypothesis) or "for" themselves, as a by-product of planning and articulating utterances. Three experiments addressed these issues. In Experiments 1 and 3, speakers followed pictorial guides to spontaneously instruct addressees to move objects. Critical instructions (e.g., "Put the dog in the basket on the star") were syntactically ambiguous, and the referential situation supported either one or both interpretations. Speakers reliably produced disambiguating cues to syntactic ambiguity whether the situation was ambiguous or not. However, Experiment 2 suggested that most speakers were not yet aware of whether the situation was ambiguous by the time they began to speak, and so adapting to addressees' particular needs may not have been feasible in Experiment 1. Experiment 3 examined individual speakers' awareness of situational ambiguity and the extent to which they signaled structure, with or without addressees present. Speakers tended to produce prosodic cues to syntactic boundaries regardless of their addressees' needs in particular situations. Such cues did prove helpful to addressees, who correctly interpreted speakers' instructions virtually all the time. In fact, even when speakers produced syntactically ambiguous utterances in situations that supported both interpretations, eye-tracking data showed that 40% of the time addressees did not even consider the non-intended objects. We discuss the standards needed for a convincing test of the audience design hypothesis.

Adult↗

Perceptual learning for speech: Is there a return to normal?

Recent work on perceptual learning shows that listeners' phonemic representations dynamically adjust to reflect the speech they hear (Norris, McQueen, & Cutler, 2003). We investigate how the perceptual system makes such adjustments, and what (if anything) causes the representations to return to their pre-perceptual learning settings. Listeners are exposed to a speaker whose pronunciation of a particular sound (either /s/ or /integral/) is ambiguous (e.g., halfway between /s/ and /integral/). After exposure, participants are tested for perceptual learning on two continua that range from /s/ to /integral/, one in the Same voice they heard during exposure, and one in a Different voice. To assess how representations revert to their prior settings, half of Experiment 1's participants were tested immediately after exposure; the other half performed a 25-min silent intervening task. The perceptual learning effect was actually larger after such a delay, indicating that simply allowing time to pass does not cause learning to fade. The remaining experiments investigate different ways that the system might unlearn a person's pronunciations: listeners hear the Same or a Different speaker for 25 min with either: no relevant (i.e., 'good') /s/ or /integral/ input (Experiment 2), one of the relevant inputs (Experiment 3), or both relevant inputs (Experiment 4). The results support a view of phonemic representations as dynamic and flexible, and suggest that they interact with both higher- (e.g., lexical) and lower-level (e.g., acoustic) information in important ways.

Adaptation, Psychological↗