Displaying 1 - 7 of 7
-
Hintz, F., Dijkhuis, M., Van 't Hoff, V., Huijsmans, M., Kievit, R. A., McQueen, J. M., & Meyer, A. S. (2025). Evaluating the factor structure of the Dutch Individual Differences in Language Skills (IDLaS-NL) test battery. Brain Research, 1852: 149502. doi:10.1016/j.brainres.2025.149502.
Abstract
Individual differences in using language are prevalent in our daily lives. Language skills are often assessed in vocational (predominantly written language) and diagnostic contexts. Not much is known, however, about individual differences in spoken language skills. The lack of research is in part due to the lack of suitable test instruments. We introduce the Individual Differences in Language Skills (IDLaS-NL) test battery, a set of 31 behavioural tests that can be used to capture variability in language and relevant general cognitive skills in adult speakers of Dutch. The battery was designed to measure word and sentence production and comprehension skills, linguistic knowledge, nonverbal processing speed, working memory, and nonverbal reasoning. The present article outlines the structure of the battery, describes the materials and procedure of each test, and evaluates the battery’s factor structure based on the results of a sample of 748 Dutch adults, aged between 18 and 30 years, most of them students. The analyses demonstrate that the battery has good construct validity and can be reliably administered both in the lab and via the internet. We therefore recommend the battery as a valuable new tool to assess individual differences in language knowledge and skills; this future work may include linking language skills to other aspects of human cognition and life outcomes. -
Norris, D., & McQueen, J. M. (2025). Why might there be lexical-prelexical feedback in speech recognition? Cognition, 255: 106025. doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2024.106025.
Abstract
In reply to Magnuson, Crinnion, Luthra, Gaston, and Grubb (2023), we challenge their conclusion that on-line activation feedback improves word recognition. This type of feedback is instantiated in the TRACE model (McClelland & Elman, 1986) as top-down spread of activation from lexical to phoneme nodes. We give two main reasons why Magnuson et al.'s demonstration that activation feedback speeds up word recognition in TRACE is not informative about whether activation feedback helps humans recognize words. First, the same speed-up could be achieved by changing other parameters in TRACE. Second, more fundamentally, there is room for improvement in TRACE's performance only because the model, unlike Bayesian models, is suboptimal. We also challenge Magnuson et al.'s claim that the available empirical data support activation feedback. The data they base this claim on are open to alternative explanations and there are data against activation feedback that they do not discuss. We argue, therefore, that there are no computational or empirical grounds to conclude that activation feedback benefits human spoken-word recognition and indeed no theoretical grounds why activation feedback would exist. Other types of feedback, for example feedback to support perceptual learning, likely do exist, precisely because they can help listeners recognize words. -
Cho, T., & McQueen, J. M. (2008). Not all sounds in assimilation environments are perceived equally: Evidence from Korean. Journal of Phonetics, 36, 239-249. doi:doi:10.1016/j.wocn.2007.06.001.
Abstract
This study tests whether potential differences in the perceptual robustness of speech sounds influence continuous-speech processes. Two phoneme-monitoring experiments examined place assimilation in Korean. In Experiment 1, Koreans monitored for targets which were either labials (/p,m/) or alveolars (/t,n/), and which were either unassimilated or assimilated to a following /k/ in two-word utterances. Listeners detected unaltered (unassimilated) labials faster and more accurately than assimilated labials; there was no such advantage for unaltered alveolars. In Experiment 2, labial–velar differences were tested using conditions in which /k/ and /p/ were illegally assimilated to a following /t/. Unassimilated sounds were detected faster than illegally assimilated sounds, but this difference tended to be larger for /k/ than for /p/. These place-dependent asymmetries suggest that differences in the perceptual robustness of segments play a role in shaping phonological patterns. -
Cutler, A., McQueen, J. M., Butterfield, S., & Norris, D. (2008). Prelexically-driven perceptual retuning of phoneme boundaries. In Proceedings of Interspeech 2008 (pp. 2056-2056).
Abstract
Listeners heard an ambiguous /f-s/ in nonword contexts where only one of /f/ or /s/ was legal (e.g., frul/*srul or *fnud/snud). In later categorisation of a phonetic continuum from /f/ to /s/, their category boundaries had shifted; hearing -rul led to expanded /f/ categories, -nud expanded /s/. Thus phonotactic sequence information alone induces perceptual retuning of phoneme category boundaries; lexical access is not required. -
Norris, D., & McQueen, J. M. (2008). Shortlist B: A Bayesian model of continuous speech recognition. Psychological Review, 115(2), 357-395. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.115.2.357.
Abstract
A Bayesian model of continuous speech recognition is presented. It is based on Shortlist ( D. Norris, 1994; D. Norris, J. M. McQueen, A. Cutler, & S. Butterfield, 1997) and shares many of its key assumptions: parallel competitive evaluation of multiple lexical hypotheses, phonologically abstract prelexical and lexical representations, a feedforward architecture with no online feedback, and a lexical segmentation algorithm based on the viability of chunks of the input as possible words. Shortlist B is radically different from its predecessor in two respects. First, whereas Shortlist was a connectionist model based on interactive-activation principles, Shortlist B is based on Bayesian principles. Second, the input to Shortlist B is no longer a sequence of discrete phonemes; it is a sequence of multiple phoneme probabilities over 3 time slices per segment, derived from the performance of listeners in a large-scale gating study. Simulations are presented showing that the model can account for key findings: data on the segmentation of continuous speech, word frequency effects, the effects of mispronunciations on word recognition, and evidence on lexical involvement in phonemic decision making. The success of Shortlist B suggests that listeners make optimal Bayesian decisions during spoken-word recognition. -
Reinisch, E., Jesse, A., & McQueen, J. M. (2008). The strength of stress-related lexical competition depends on the presence of first-syllable stress. In Proceedings of Interspeech 2008 (pp. 1954-1954).
Abstract
Dutch listeners' looks to printed words were tracked while they listened to instructions to click with their mouse on one of them. When presented with targets from word pairs where the first two syllables were segmentally identical but differed in stress location, listeners used stress information to recognize the target before segmental information disambiguated the words. Furthermore, the amount of lexical competition was influenced by the presence or absence of word-initial stress. -
Reinisch, E., Jesse, A., & McQueen, J. M. (2008). Lexical stress information modulates the time-course of spoken-word recognition. In Proceedings of Acoustics' 08 (pp. 3183-3188).
Abstract
Segmental as well as suprasegmental information is used by Dutch listeners to recognize words. The time-course of the effect of suprasegmental stress information on spoken-word recognition was investigated in a previous study, in which we tracked Dutch listeners' looks to arrays of four printed words as they listened to spoken sentences. Each target was displayed along with a competitor that did not differ segmentally in its first two syllables but differed in stress placement (e.g., 'CENtimeter' and 'sentiMENT'). The listeners' eye-movements showed that stress information is used to recognize the target before distinct segmental information is available. Here, we examine the role of durational information in this effect. Two experiments showed that initial-syllable duration, as a cue to lexical stress, is not interpreted dependent on the speaking rate of the preceding carrier sentence. This still held when other stress cues like pitch and amplitude were removed. Rather, the speaking rate of the preceding carrier affected the speed of word recognition globally, even though the rate of the target itself was not altered. Stress information modulated lexical competition, but did so independently of the rate of the preceding carrier, even if duration was the only stress cue present.
Share this page