Perceptual compensation for coarticulation (PCCA) refers to listener responses consistent with perceptual reduction of the acoustic effects of the coarticulatory context on a target sound. The robustness of PCCA across individuals and across tasks have not been studied together previously. This study reports the results of two experiments designed to determine the robustness of perceptual compensation for vocalic influence on sibilant perception across tasks and the stability of such compensatory response within an individual. Identification and discrimination data, collected in the laboratory and on Amazon's Mechanical Turk, showed that individuals are moderately stable in their PCCA responses across tasks and the level of stability is consistent across both the lab-based and the internet-based cohorts, although some differences are observed.
REFERENCES
1.
V. A.
Mann
and B. H.
Repp
, “Influence of vocalic context on perception of the [sh]-[s] distinction
,” Percept. Psychophys.
28
, 213
–228
(1980
).2.
P. S.
Beddor
, J.
Harnsberger
, and S.
Lindemann
, “Language-specific patterns of vowel-to-vowel coarticulation: acoustic structures and their perceptual correlates
,” J. Phonetics
30
, 591
–627
(2002
).3.
J.-M.
Hombert
, `“Development of tones from vowel height?
,” J. Phonetics
5
, 9
–16
(1977
).4.
P.
Beddor
and R. A.
Krakow
, “Perception of coarticulatory nasalization by speakers of English and Thai: Evidence for partial compensation
,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am.
106
(5
), 2868
–2887
(1999
).5.
P. S.
Beddor
, “A coarticulatory path to sound change
,” Language
85
(4
), 785
–832
(2009
).6.
J.
Elman
and J.
McClelland
, “Cognitive penetration of the mechanisms of perception: Compensation for coarticulation of lexically restored phonemes
,” J. Memory Lang.
27
, 143
–165
(1988
).7.
C.
Fowler
, “Compensation for coarticulation reflects gesture perception, not spectral contrast
,” Percept. Psychophys.
68
(2
), 161
–177
(2006
).8.
A.
Lotto
and K.
Kluender
, “General contrast effects in speech perception: Effect of preceding liquid on stop consonant identification
,” Percept. Psychophys.
60
(4
), 602
–619
(1998
).9.
J.
Ohala
, “The phonetics of sound change
,” in Historical Linguistics: Problems and Perspectives
, edited by C.
Jones
(Longman Academic
, London
, 1993
), Chap. 9, pp. 237
–278
.10.
J.
Blevins
, Evolutionary Phonology: The Emergence of Sound Patterns
(Cambridge University Press
, Cambridge
, 2004
).11.
M. E.
Stewart
and M.
Ota
, “Lexical effects on speech perception in individuals with ‘autistic’ traits
,” Cognition
109
, 157
–162
(2008
).12.
A. C. L.
Yu
, “Perceptual compensation is correlated with individuals' ‘autistic’ traits: Implications for models of sound change
,” PLoS One
5
(8
), e11950
(2010
).13.
A. C. L.
Yu
, J.
Grove
, M.
Martinović
, and M.
Sonderegger
, Effects of Working Memory Capacity and “Autistic” Traits on Phonotactic Effects in Speech Perception
, edited by E.
Zee
(International Congress of the Phonetic Sciences
, Hong Kong
, 2011
), pp. 2236
–2239
.14.
A. C. L.
Yu
, Individual Differences in Socio-cognitive Processing and the Actuation of Sound Change
, edited by A. C. L.
Yu
(Oxford University Press
, Oxford, UK
, 2013
), Chap. 10, pp. 201
–227
.15.
A.
Baker
, D.
Archangeli
, and J.
Mielke
, “Variability in American English s-retraction suggests a solution to the actuation problem
,” Lang. Var. Change
23
(3
), 347
–374
(2011
).16.
A.
Garrett
and K.
Johnson
, Phonetic Biases in Sound Change
, edited by A. C. L.
Yu
(Oxford University Press
, Oxford
, 2013
), Chap. 3, pp. 51
–97
.17.
A. M.
Liberman
, K. S.
Harris
, H. S.
Hoffman
, and B. C.
Griffith
, “The discrimination of speech sounds within and across phoneme boundaries
,” J. Exp. Psychol.
54
, 358
–368
(1957
).18.
B. H.
Repp
, “Two strategies in fricative discrimination
,” Percept. Psychophys.
30
(3
), 217
–227
(1981
).19.
E.
Gibson
, S.
Piantadosi
, and K.
Fedorenko
, “Using Mechanical Turk to obtain and analyze English acceptability judgments
,” Lang. Ling. Compass
5
(8
), 509
–524
(2011
).20.
J.
Sprouse
, “A validation of Amazon Mechanical Turk for the collection of acceptability judgments in linguistic theory
,” Behav. Res. Methods
43
(1
), 155
–167
(2011
).21.
J. D. W.
Stephens
and L. L.
Holt
, “Preceding phonetic context affects perception of nonspeech
,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am.
114
(6
), 3036
–3039
(2003
).22.
P.
Boersma
and D.
Weenink
, Praat [computer program] (2011
).23.
D.
Bates
, M.
Maechler
, and B.
Bolker
, lme4, r package version 0.999375-38 [computer program] (2011
).24.
William
Labov
, in Triggering Events
, edited by S.
Fitzmaurice
and D.
Minkova
(Mouton de Grutyer
, Berlin
, 2008
), pp. 11
–54
.25.
J.
Milroy
and L.
Milroy
, “Linguistic change, social network and speaker innovation
,” J. Ling.
21
(2
), 339
–384
(1985
).© 2014 Acoustical Society of America.
2014
Acoustical Society of America
You do not currently have access to this content.