Presentations

Abstract

Listeners are known to use contextual speech rate in processing temporally ambiguous speech sounds. For instance, a fast adjacent speech context makes a vowel sound relatively long, whereas a slow context makes it sound relatively short (Reinisch & Sjerps, 2013). Besides the local contextual speech rate, listeners also track talker-specific habitual speech rates (Reinisch, 2016; Maslowski et al., in press). However, effects of one’s own speech rate on the perception of another talker’s speech are yet unexplored. Such effects are potentially important, given that, in dialogue, a listener’s own speech often constitutes the context for the interlocutor’s speech. Three experiments tested the contribution of self-produced speech on perception of the habitual speech rate of another talker. In Experiment 1, one group of participants was instructed to speak fast (high-rate group), whereas another group had to speak slowly (low-rate group; 16 participants per group). The two groups were compared on their perception of ambiguous Dutch /A/-/a:/ vowels embedded in neutral rate speech from another talker. In Experiment 2, the same participants listened to playback of their own speech, whilst evaluating target vowels in neutral rate speech as before. Neither of these experiments provided support for the involvement of self-produced speech in perception of another talker's speech rate. Experiment 3 repeated Experiment 2 with a new participant sample, who did not know the participants from the previous two experiments. Here, a group effect was found on perception of the neutral rate talker. This result replicates the finding of Maslowski et al. that habitual speech rates are perceived relative to each other (i.e., neutral rate sounds fast in the presence of a slower talker and vice versa), with naturally produced speech. Taken together, the findings show that self-produced speech is processed differently from speech produced by others. They carry implications for our understanding of the perceptual and cognitive mechanisms involved in rate-dependent speech perception and the link between production and perception in dialogue settings.

Abstract

Interlocutors perceive phonemic category boundaries relative to talkers’ produced speech rates. For instance, a temporally ambiguous vowel between Dutch short /A/ and long /a:/ sounds short (i.e., as /A/) in a slow speech context, but long in a fast context. Besides the local contextual speech rate, listeners also track talker-specific habitual speech rates (Maslowski et al., in press). However, it is yet unclear whether self-produced speech rate modulates perception of another talker’s habitual rate. Such effects are potentially important, given that, in dialogue, a listener’s own speech often constitutes the context for the interlocutor’s speech. Three experiments addressed this question. In Experiment 1, one group of participants was instructed to speak fast, whereas another group had to speak slowly (16 participants per group). The two groups were then compared on their perception of ambiguous Dutch /A/-/a:/ vowels embedded in neutral rate speech from another talker. In Experiment 2, the same participants listened to playback of their own speech, whilst evaluating target vowels in neutral rate speech as before. Neither of these experiments provided support for the involvement of self-produced speech in perception of another talker's speech rate. Experiment 3 repeated Experiment 2 with a new participant sample, who were unfamiliar with the participants from the previous two experiments. Here, a group effect was found on perception of the neutral rate talker. This result replicates the finding of Maslowski et al. that habitual speech rates are perceived relative to each other (i.e., neutral rate sounds fast in the presence of a slower talker and vice versa), with naturally produced speech. Taken together, the findings show that self-produced speech is processed differently from speech produced by others. They carry implications for our understanding of the link between production and perception in dialogue.

Abstract

That speakers can vary their speaking rate is evident, but how they accomplish this has
hardly been studied. The effortful experience of deviating from one's preferred speaking rate
might result from shifting between different regimes (system configurations) of the speech
planning system. This study investigates control over speech rate through simulations of a
new connectionist computational model of the cognitive process of speech production, derived
from Dell, Burger and Svec’s (1997) model to fit the temporal characteristics of observed
speech. We draw an analogy from human movement: the selection of walking and running
gaits to achieve different movement speeds. Are the regimes of the speech production system
arranged into multiple ‘gaits’ that resemble walking and running?
During training of the model, different parameter settings are identified for different speech
rates, which can be conflated with the regimes of the speech production system. The
parameters can be considered to be dimensions of a high-dimensional ‘regime space’, in
which different regimes occupy different parts of the space.
In a single gait system, the regimes are qualitatively similar, but quantitatively different.
They are arranged along a straight line through regime space. Different points along this axis
correspond directly to different speaking rates. In a multiple gait system, the arrangement of
the regimes is more disperse, with no obvious relationship between the regions associated
with each gait.
After training, the model achieved good fits in all three speaking rates, and the parameter
settings associated with each speaking rate were different. The broad arrangement of the
parameter settings for the different speaking rates in regime space was non-axial, suggesting
that ‘gaits’ may be present in the speech planning system.

Abstract

In recent years, the theory that prediction is an important part of language processing has gained considerable attention (see Huettig, 2015, for overview). There is a large body of empirical evidence which suggests that language users’ ability to anticipate interlocutors’ upcoming utterances is one of the reasons why interactive speech can be so effortless, smooth, and efficient in nature (e.g. Wicha et al., 2004; van Berkum et al., 2005). The present study aimed to investigate whether the language production module is affected by prediction of another individual’s utterances using a joint language production task designed to establish whether simulation of an interlocutor’s utterance occurs automatically, even if this hinders one’s own speech production. The experiment aimed to replicate the finding of an interference effect in a joint naming task (Gambi et al., 2015), and investigate whether the same patterns could be found within a clearer social context where a partner was co-present in the same room. Participants named pictures of objects while their partners concurrently named or categorised congruent or incongruent stimuli. Analyses of naming onset latencies indicate that individuals may partially co-represent their partner’s utterances and that this shared representation influences language production. Congruency in task and stimuli display facilitated naming compared to incongruent trials which showed a tendency to impede production latencies. This finding of a social effect in a setting where simulation of language content is not necessary may suggest that some kind of anticipatory processing is an underlying feature of comprehension.

Abstract

Previous work on memory phenomena shows that pictures and words lead to a production effect, i.e. better memory for aloud than silent items, and that this interacts with the picture superiority effect, i.e. better memory for pictures than words (Fawcett, Quinlan and Taylor, 2012). We investigated the role of the generation effect, i.e. improved memory for generated words, in picture naming. As picture naming requires participants to think of an appropriate label, a generation effect might be elicited for pictures but not words. Forty-two participants named pictures silently or aloud and were given the correct picture name or an unreadable label; all conditions included pictures to control for the picture superiority effect. Memory was then tested using a yes/no recognition task. We found a production effect (p < 0.001) showing the role of articulation in memory, a generation effect (p < 0.001) showing the role of lexical access in memory, and an interaction (p <0.05) between the two suggesting the non-independence of the effects. Ongoing work further tests the role of label reliability in eliciting these effects. This research demonstrates a role for the generation effect in picture naming, with implications for memory asymmetries at different stages in language production.

Abstract

When processing visual objects, we integrate visual, linguistic and spatial information to form an episodic trace. Re-activating one aspect of the episodic trace of an object re-activates the entire bundle making all integrated information available. Using the blank screen paradigm [1], researchers observed that upon processing spoken linguistic input, participants tended to make eye movements on a blank screen, fixating locations that were previously occupied by objects mentioned in the linguistic utterance or were related. Ferreira and colleagues [2] suggested that 'looking at nothing' facilitated memory retrieval. However, this claim lacks convincing empirical support. In Experiment 1, Dutch participants looked at four-object-displays. Three objects were related to a spoken target word. Given the target word 'beker' (beaker), the display featured a phonological (a bear), a shape (a bobbin), a semantic (a fork) competitor, and an unrelated distractor (an umbrella). Participants were asked to name the objects as fast as possible. Subsequently, the objects disappeared. Participants fixated the center of the screen and listened to the target word. They had to carry out a semantic judgment task (indicating in which position an object had appeared that was semantically related to the objects) or a visual shape similarity judgment (indicating the position of the object similar in shape to the target). In both conditions, we observed that participants re-fixated the empty target location before responding. The set-up of Experiment 2 was identical except that we asked participants to maintain fixating the center of the screen while listening to the spoken word and responding. Performance accuracy was significantly lower in Experiment 2 than in Experiment 1. The results indicate that memory retrieval for objects is impaired when participants are not allowed to look at relevant, though empty locations. [1] Altmann, G. (2004). Language-mediated eye movements in the absence of a visual world: the 'blank screen paradigm'. Cognition, 93(2), B79-B87. [2] Ferreira, F., Apel, J., & Henderson, J. M. (2008). Taking a new look at looking at nothing. Trends Cogn Sci, 12(11), 405-410.

Abstract

Sentence formulation requires mapping pre-verbal messages onto linguistic structures. This message-to-language
mapping is often evaluated in eye-tracking tasks where speakers describe pictured events (The dog chased the mailman).
Speakers can begin sentence formulation by quickly selecting the first-fixated character as the sentential starting point
(lexical incrementality), or generating a rudimentary sentence plan based on their construal of the event gist before
selecting a starting point (hierarchical incrementality; Kuchinsky & Bock, 2010). Lexical incrementality predicts fast
divergence of fixations while hierarchical incrementality predicts slower divergence of fixations to the two characters
within 200ms of picture onset.

Abstract

Much evidence demonstrates cerebellar involvement in language [1] but a theoretical framework about its precise role is lacking. In cerebellar motor control an influential model ascribes the cerebellum a predictive role [2]. It has been argued that cerebellar nonmotor regions perform similar computations as motor regions, and both are involved in online prediction [2]. We test this hypothesis by administering repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) to the right cerebellum, a region implicated in language [3] during a predictive language task. Methods Visual World task [4]: Participants' eye movements were recorded while they listened to sentences and looked at a computer display of an agent and 4 objects, one of which (the target) was mentioned in the sentence. In the Prediction condition the object could be predicted on the basis of the verb; on Control trials it could not. We hypothesised that rTMS to the right cerebellum should make target fixation slower in the Prediction condition, but not in the Control condition. TMS protocol: TMS was delivered between two task blocks. In the cerebellar rTMS group (n = 22) the stimulation site was 1cm down and 3cm right of the inion. Participants received 10min of 1Hz rTMS. In addition, we tested two control groups. In the vertex rTMS group (n = 21), rTMS was applied at the same intensity, duration and frequency as in the cerebellar rTMS group, but over the vertex. In the no stimulation group (n = 22) the coil was placed over the cerebellar stimulation site but no pulses were delivered. Results As hypothesised, participants in the cerebellar rTMS group took longer to fixate the target after TMS in the Prediction condition but not in the Control condition (Block-by-Condition interaction: F(1,21) = 8.848, p = 0.007). This interaction was not found in either the vertex rTMS group (F(1,20) = 0.064, p = 0.802) or the no stimulation group (F(1,21) = 2.461, p = 0.132). Conclusions Here, we show that rTMS to the right cerebellum selectively affects linguistic prediction. These results provide additional evidence that the cerebellum plays a role in language and support theoretical accounts that the cerebellum contributes to nonmotor functions, as it does to motor functions, by online prediction. 1. Strick et al (2009). Cerebellum and nonmotor function. Annu Rev Neurosci, 32, 413-134 2. Miall et al (1993). Is the cerebellum a Smith predictor. J Mot Behav, 25, 203-216 3. Marien et al (2001). The lateralised linguistic cerebellum: a review and a new hypothesis. Brain and Language, 79, 580-600 4. Altmann & Kamide (1999). Incremental interpretation at verbs. Cognition, 73, 247-264

Abstract

In sentence comprehension, readers and listeners often anticipate upcoming information (e.g., Altmann & Kamide, 1999). We investigated two aspects of this process, namely 1) what is pre-activated when anticipating an upcoming word (the contents of predictions), and 2) which cognitive mechanisms are involved. The contents of predictions at the level of meaning could be restricted to functional semantic attributes (e.g., edibility; Altmann & Kamide, 1999). However, when words are processed other types of information can also be activated, such as object shape representations. It is unknown whether this type of information is already activated when upcoming words are predicted. Forty-five adult participants listened to predictable words in sentence contexts (e.g., "In 1969 Neil Armstrong was the first man to set foot on the moon.") while looking at visual displays of four objects. Their eye movements were recorded. There were three conditions: target present (e.g., a moon and three distractor objects that were unrelated to the predictable word in terms of semantics, shape, and phonology), shape competitor (e.g., a tomato and three unrelated distractors), and distractors only (e.g., rice and three other unrelated objects). Across lists, the same pictures and sentences were used in the different conditions. We found that participants already showed a significant bias for the target object (moon) over unrelated distractors several seconds before the target was mentioned, demonstrating that they were predicting. Importantly, there was also a smaller but significant shape competitor (tomato) preference starting at about a second before critical word onset, consistent with predictions involving the referent’s shape. The mechanisms of predictions could be specific to language tasks, or language could use processing principles that are also used in other domains of cognition. We investigated whether performance in non-linguistic prediction is related to prediction in language processing, taking an individual differences approach. In addition to the language processing task, the participants performed a simple cueing task (after Posner, Nissen, & Ogden, 1978). They pressed one of two buttons (left/right) to indicate the location of an X symbol on the screen. On half of the trials, the X was preceded by a neutral cue (+). On the other half, an arrow cue pointing left (<) or right (>) indicated the upcoming X's location with 80% validity (i.e., the arrow cue was correct 80% of the time). The SOA between cue and target was 500 ms. Prediction was quantified as the mean response latency difference between the neutral and valid condition. This measure correlated positively with individual participants' anticipatory target and shape competitor preference (r = .27; r = .45), and was a significant predictor of anticipatory looks in linear mixed-effects regression models of the data. Participants who showed more facilitation from the arrow cues predicted to a higher degree in the linguistic task. This suggests that prediction in language processing may use mechanisms that are also used in other domains of cognition. References Altmann, G. T. M., & Kamide, Y. (1999). Incremental interpretation at verbs: Restricting the domain of subsequent reference. Cognition, 73(3), 247-264. Posner, M. I., Nissen, M. J., & Ogden, W. C. (1978). Attended and unattended processing modes: The role of set for spatial location. In: H.L. Pick, & I.J. Saltzman (Eds.), Modes of perceiving and processing information. Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.