Perceptual learning for speech

By Arthur G. Samuel, Tanya Kraljic. Attention, perception & psychophysics, 2009

677 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Artificial Intelligence, Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, Signal Processing

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/c985c9ebb09d3e4d176a62fbe38e9fa6c6e4fa3d

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Artificial Intelligence

In Experimental and Cognitive Psychology

In Signal Processing

Citations in the corpus

Speech recognition in adverse conditions: A review (2012, background): “, 2008) or inclusion of ambiguous speech segments (Eisner & McQueen, 2005; Kraljic & Samuel, 2007; Norris et al., 2003).”
Non-native speech perception in adverse conditions: A review (2010, background): “They can, for instance, learn that a particular talker has a deviant pronunciation of a certain phoneme, and they can adjust their phonemic categorisations for that talker's speech very rapidly and on the basis of very little experience (Norris et al., 2003; Eisner and McQueen, 2005).”
Rich memory and distributed phonology (2010, background): “…speaker, the subject will not only make a correction for training items spoken by the familiar voice (when presented with ambiguous stimuli), but also generalize the compensation to syllabic positions that have not been heard (Norris et al., 2003; Cutler et al., 2006; Nygaard and Pisoni, 1998).”
Converging toward a common speech code: imitative and perceptuo-motor recalibration processes in speech production (2013, neutral): “ORIGINAL RESEARCH ARTICLE published: 11 July 2013 doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00422 Converging toward a common speech code: imitative and perceptuo-motor recalibration processes in speech production”
Perceptual adjustments to multiple speakers (2007, positive): “Following the Norris et al. (2003) paradigm, the lexical context in which the sound occurred determined how listeners would come to perceive it; for example, some listeners heard the ambiguous sound in place of /d/ (in words such as crocodile), and others heard the same sound in place of /t/ (in…”
Specificity and abstractness of VOT imitation (2011, background): “Norris et al. (2003) demonstrated that listeners trained on stimuli containing ambiguous /s/-/f/ phonemes subsequently showed an appropriate shift in their /s/-/f/ categorization boundaries (perceptual learning).”
Phonetic and social selectivity in speech accommodation (2009, background): “The fact that the perceptual categories of language are labile is well grounded (Norris et al. 2003, Kraljic and Samuel 2005, 2006, 2007, Kraljic et al. 2008a,b, Maye et al. 2008).”
Shortlist B: a Bayesian model of continuous speech recognition. (2008, background): “, listening to drunks rather than sober people), and adjustments in these probabilities due to perceptual learning (Norris et al., 2003), there can also be differences across experiments as a function, for example, of changes in experimentinternal probabilities of particular events (Clayards et al.”
Rapid Expectation Adaptation during Syntactic Comprehension (2013, background): “This work comes from research on phonetics [117–119], lexical processing [120,121], prosody [122], pragmatics [123], and syntax (e.”
Perceptual adaptation to non-native speech. (2008, methodology): “…stimuli facilitates perceptual adaptation to foreign-accented speech as it does in the case of lexically-driven adaptation to nativeaccented speech (Norris et al., 2003), then listeners should show faster and more extensive adaptation to foreign-accented speech with a relatively high baseline…”