Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorCrinnion, Anne Marie
dc.contributor.authorLuthra, Sahil
dc.contributor.authorGaston, Phoebe
dc.contributor.authorMagnuson, James S.
dc.date2025-02-22
dc.date.accessioned2024-09-26T14:41:18Z
dc.date.available2024-09-26T14:41:18Z
dc.date.issued2024
dc.identifier.citationCrinnion, A.M., Luthra, S., Gaston, P., & Magnuson, J. S. (2024). Resolving competing predictions in speech: How qualitatively different cues and cue reliability contribute to phoneme identification. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 86, 942–961. Doi:10.3758/s13414-024-02849-yes_ES
dc.identifier.citationAttention, Perception, & Psychophysics
dc.identifier.issn1943-3921
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10810/69561
dc.descriptionPublished on 22 February 2024es_ES
dc.description.abstractListeners have many sources of information available in interpreting speech. Numerous theoretical frameworks and paradigms have established that various constraints impact the processing of speech sounds, but it remains unclear how listeners might simultaneously consider multiple cues, especially those that differ qualitatively (i.e., with respect to timing and/or modality) or quantitatively (i.e., with respect to cue reliability). Here, we establish that cross-modal identity priming can influence the interpretation of ambiguous phonemes (Exp. 1, N = 40) and show that two qualitatively distinct cues – namely, cross-modal identity priming and auditory co-articulatory context – have additive effects on phoneme identification (Exp. 2, N = 40). However, we find no effect of quantitative variation in a cue – specifically, changes in the reliability of the priming cue did not influence phoneme identification (Exp. 3a, N = 40; Exp. 3b, N = 40). Overall, we find that qualitatively distinct cues can additively influence phoneme identification. While many existing theoretical frameworks address constraint integration to some degree, our results provide a step towards understanding how information that differs in both timing and modality is integrated in online speech perception.es_ES
dc.description.sponsorshipThis research was supported by National Science Foundation (NSF) grants NRT 1747486 and PAC 2043903 (PI JSM). Phoebe Gaston was supported by NSF grant CRCNS 2207770. Any opinions, f indings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation. Anne Marie Crinnion and Phoebe Gaston were supported by NIH T32 DC017703. Sahil Luthra was supported by NIH F32 DC020625. Anne Marie Crinnion was supported by F31 DC021372. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health. This research was also supported in part by the Basque Government through the BERC 2022-2025 program and by the Spanish State Research Agency through BCBL Severo Ochoa excellence accreditation CEX2020-001010-S and through project PID2020-119131GB-I00 (BLIS).es_ES
dc.language.isoenges_ES
dc.publisherSPRINGER NATUREes_ES
dc.relationinfo:eu-repo/grantAgreement/GV/BERC2022-2025es_ES
dc.relationinfo:eu-repo/grantAgreement/AEI/CEX2020-001010-Ses_ES
dc.relationinfo:eu-repo/grantAgreement/AEI/PID2020-119131GB-I00es_ES
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/embargoedAccesses_ES
dc.subjectSpeech perceptiones_ES
dc.subjectSpoken word recognitiones_ES
dc.subjectPriminges_ES
dc.titleResolving competing predictions in speech: How qualitatively different cues and cue reliability contribute to phoneme identificationes_ES
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/articlees_ES
dc.rights.holder© The Psychonomic Society, Inc. 2024es_ES
dc.relation.publisherversionhttps://link.springer.com/journal/13414es_ES
dc.identifier.doi10.3758/s13414-024-02849-y


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record