Vol 34 No 1 (2015): .
Hearing
How to Cite
Saransh Jain, & NP, N. (1). Effect of Vowel Duration and Noise on the Perception of Stop-Glide Continuum. Journal of All India Institute of Speech and Hearing, 34(1), 110-116. Retrieved from http://203.129.241.91/jaiish/index.php/aiish/article/view/855
Abstract
The present study aimed to investigate the eect of vowel length and noise on perception of stop-glide continuum. A nine point stop-glide continuum was created by varying the onset frequency of second formant. The continuum was then manipulated for two lengths of vowel following the consonant and three levels of background noise. The stimuli were presented to 30 normal hearing adult participants and the responses were recorded for identication and reaction time task. The results for the identication task revealed that vowel length had a signicant eect on the perceptual process with the categorical boundary shifted towards the perception of stop consonant in the presence of long vowel. However, in the presence of noise, the eects of vowel length cues were limited.
In such condition, the probable role of multiple acoustic cues in the perception of speech sounds is suggested. On the contrary, no signicant eect of vowel length and/or noise was observed in the time taken for the participants to respond to the stimuli. These results were discussed in terms of the role of perceptual normalcy in uencing the eect of noise.
References
Alwan, A. (1992). The role of F3 and F4 in identify-
ing the place of articulation for stop consonants. In
Proceedings of the International Conference on Spoken
Language Processing (pp. 1063-1066). Ban : Canada.
Boersma, P. (1993). Accurate short-term analysis of the
fundamental frequency and the harmonics-to-noise ra-
tio of a sampled sound. In Proceedings of the Institute
of Phonetic Sciences (Vol. 17, pp. 97-110). Amsterdam:
University of Amsterdam.
Boersma, P., & Weenink, D. (2016). Praat: doing phonet-
ics by computer (Version 6.0.10) [Windows]. Retrieved
from http://www.praat.org/
Forster, K. I., & Forster, J. C. (2003). DMDX: a windows
display program with millisecond accuracy. Behavior
Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers: A Jour-
nal of the Psychonomic Society, Inc, 35(1), 116-124.
Greenberg, S., & Ainsworth, W. (2012). Listening to Speech:
An Auditory Perspective. Retrieved from https://nls.ldls.
org.uk/welcome.html?ark:/81055/vdc 100025692216.0x000001
Holt, L. L., & Lotto, A. J. (2010). Speech
perception as categorization. Attention, Per-
ception & Psychophysics, 72(5), 1218-1227.
http://doi.org/10.3758/APP.72.5.1218
Jain, S., Nataraja, N. P., & Nair, S. P. (2014). A study on
the role of temporal integration of VOT, vowel length
and noise in the perception of bilabial stops. Journal of
All India Institute of Speech and Hearing, 33(1), 51-58.
Johnson, K. (2005). Speaker Normalization in Speech Per-
ception. In D. B. Pisoni & R. E. Remez (Eds.), The
Handbook of Speech Perception (pp. 363?389). Oxford,
UK: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
Loizou, P. C. (2000). Colea: A Matlab software tool for
speech analysis. Retrieved from http://www.utdallas.edu/
loizou/speech/colea.htm
McMurray, B. (2009). KlattWorks: A [somewhat] new sys-
tematic approach to formant-based speech synthesis for
empirical research. Manuscript in preparation.
McMurray, B., & Spivey, M. J. (1999). The Categorical
Perception of Consonants: The Interaction of Learning
and Processing. In Proceedings of the Chicago Linguis-
tics Society (pp. 205-219). Chicago.
McMurray, B., Tanenhaus, M. K., & Aslin, R. N. (2002).
Gradient e ects of within-category phonetic variation on
lexical access. Cognition, 86(2), B33-42.
Miller, J. L., & Liberman, A. M. (1979). Some e ects of
later-occurring information on the perception of stop
consonant and semivowel. Perception & Psychophysics,
25(6), 457-465.
Miller, J. L., & Wayland, S. C. (1993). Limits on the lim-
itations of context-conditioned e ects in the perception
of [b] and [w]. Perception & Psychophysics, 54(2), 205-
210.
Nabelek, A. K., Ovchinnikov, A., Czyzewski, Z., & Crowley,
H. J. (1996). Cues for perception of synthetic and nat-
ural diphthongs in either noise or reverberation. The
Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 99(3),
1742-1753.
Nataraja, N. P. (2000). Transformation of speech of hearing
impaired (Departmental Project No. 1). Mysore, India:
All India Institute of Speech and Hearing.
Parikh, G., & Loizou, P. C. (2005). The in
uence of noise on
vowel and consonant cues. The Journal of the Acoustical
Society of America, 118(6), 3874.
Pisoni, D. B., & Tash, J. (1974). Reaction times to compar-
isons within and across phonetic categories. Perception
& Psychophysics, 15(2), 285-290.
Pitt, M. A., & Samuel, A. G. (1993). An empirical and
meta-analytic evaluation of the phoneme identi cation
task. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Per-
ception and Performance, 19(4), 699-725.
Raphael, L. J. (1972). Preceding vowel duration as a
cue to the perception of the voicing characteristic of
word- nal consonants in American English. The Jour-
nal of the Acoustical Society of America, 51(4), 1296-
1303.
Schwippert, C., & Koopmans-van Beinum, F. J. (1998).
Phoneme boundary perception in dyslexic and normal-
reading adults. In Proceedings of the Institute of Pho-
netic Sciences. Amsterdam.
Shinn, P. (1984). On the role of the amplitude enve-
lope for the perception of [b] and [w]. The Jour-
nal of the Acoustical Society of America, 75(4), 1243.
http://doi.org/10.1121/1.390677.
Shinn, P. C., Blumstein, S. E., & Jongman, A. (1985). Lim-
itations of context conditioned e ects in the perception
of [b] and [w]. Perception & Psychophysics, 38(5), 397-
407. http://doi.org/10.3758/BF03207170
Soli, S. D., Arabie, P., & Carroll, J. D. (1986). Discrete
representation of perceptual structure underlying conso-
nant confusions. The Journal of the Acoustical Society
of America, 79(3), 826-837.
Wade, T., & Holt, L. L. (2005). Perceptual e ects of pre-
ceding nonspeech rate on temporal properties of speech
categories. Perception & Psychophysics, 67(6), 939-
950.
Willems, L. (1986). Robust formant analysis (IPO Report
No. 529) (pp. 1-25). Eindhoven: Institute for Percep-
tion Research.
Zhang, S., & Meng, Z. (2011). A comparative study on per-
ceptual characteristics of mandarin consonants in dif-
ferent acoustic transmission conditions. In Proceedings
of ICPhS, 2011 (pp. 2296-2299). Hong Kong. Retrieved
from https://www.internationalphoneticassociation.org
Zurek, P. M., & Delhorne, L. A. (1987). Consonant reception
in noise by listeners with mild and moderate sensorineu-
ral hearing impairment. The Journal of the Acoustical
Society of America, 82(5), 1548-1559.
ing the place of articulation for stop consonants. In
Proceedings of the International Conference on Spoken
Language Processing (pp. 1063-1066). Ban : Canada.
Boersma, P. (1993). Accurate short-term analysis of the
fundamental frequency and the harmonics-to-noise ra-
tio of a sampled sound. In Proceedings of the Institute
of Phonetic Sciences (Vol. 17, pp. 97-110). Amsterdam:
University of Amsterdam.
Boersma, P., & Weenink, D. (2016). Praat: doing phonet-
ics by computer (Version 6.0.10) [Windows]. Retrieved
from http://www.praat.org/
Forster, K. I., & Forster, J. C. (2003). DMDX: a windows
display program with millisecond accuracy. Behavior
Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers: A Jour-
nal of the Psychonomic Society, Inc, 35(1), 116-124.
Greenberg, S., & Ainsworth, W. (2012). Listening to Speech:
An Auditory Perspective. Retrieved from https://nls.ldls.
org.uk/welcome.html?ark:/81055/vdc 100025692216.0x000001
Holt, L. L., & Lotto, A. J. (2010). Speech
perception as categorization. Attention, Per-
ception & Psychophysics, 72(5), 1218-1227.
http://doi.org/10.3758/APP.72.5.1218
Jain, S., Nataraja, N. P., & Nair, S. P. (2014). A study on
the role of temporal integration of VOT, vowel length
and noise in the perception of bilabial stops. Journal of
All India Institute of Speech and Hearing, 33(1), 51-58.
Johnson, K. (2005). Speaker Normalization in Speech Per-
ception. In D. B. Pisoni & R. E. Remez (Eds.), The
Handbook of Speech Perception (pp. 363?389). Oxford,
UK: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
Loizou, P. C. (2000). Colea: A Matlab software tool for
speech analysis. Retrieved from http://www.utdallas.edu/
loizou/speech/colea.htm
McMurray, B. (2009). KlattWorks: A [somewhat] new sys-
tematic approach to formant-based speech synthesis for
empirical research. Manuscript in preparation.
McMurray, B., & Spivey, M. J. (1999). The Categorical
Perception of Consonants: The Interaction of Learning
and Processing. In Proceedings of the Chicago Linguis-
tics Society (pp. 205-219). Chicago.
McMurray, B., Tanenhaus, M. K., & Aslin, R. N. (2002).
Gradient e ects of within-category phonetic variation on
lexical access. Cognition, 86(2), B33-42.
Miller, J. L., & Liberman, A. M. (1979). Some e ects of
later-occurring information on the perception of stop
consonant and semivowel. Perception & Psychophysics,
25(6), 457-465.
Miller, J. L., & Wayland, S. C. (1993). Limits on the lim-
itations of context-conditioned e ects in the perception
of [b] and [w]. Perception & Psychophysics, 54(2), 205-
210.
Nabelek, A. K., Ovchinnikov, A., Czyzewski, Z., & Crowley,
H. J. (1996). Cues for perception of synthetic and nat-
ural diphthongs in either noise or reverberation. The
Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 99(3),
1742-1753.
Nataraja, N. P. (2000). Transformation of speech of hearing
impaired (Departmental Project No. 1). Mysore, India:
All India Institute of Speech and Hearing.
Parikh, G., & Loizou, P. C. (2005). The in
uence of noise on
vowel and consonant cues. The Journal of the Acoustical
Society of America, 118(6), 3874.
Pisoni, D. B., & Tash, J. (1974). Reaction times to compar-
isons within and across phonetic categories. Perception
& Psychophysics, 15(2), 285-290.
Pitt, M. A., & Samuel, A. G. (1993). An empirical and
meta-analytic evaluation of the phoneme identi cation
task. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Per-
ception and Performance, 19(4), 699-725.
Raphael, L. J. (1972). Preceding vowel duration as a
cue to the perception of the voicing characteristic of
word- nal consonants in American English. The Jour-
nal of the Acoustical Society of America, 51(4), 1296-
1303.
Schwippert, C., & Koopmans-van Beinum, F. J. (1998).
Phoneme boundary perception in dyslexic and normal-
reading adults. In Proceedings of the Institute of Pho-
netic Sciences. Amsterdam.
Shinn, P. (1984). On the role of the amplitude enve-
lope for the perception of [b] and [w]. The Jour-
nal of the Acoustical Society of America, 75(4), 1243.
http://doi.org/10.1121/1.390677.
Shinn, P. C., Blumstein, S. E., & Jongman, A. (1985). Lim-
itations of context conditioned e ects in the perception
of [b] and [w]. Perception & Psychophysics, 38(5), 397-
407. http://doi.org/10.3758/BF03207170
Soli, S. D., Arabie, P., & Carroll, J. D. (1986). Discrete
representation of perceptual structure underlying conso-
nant confusions. The Journal of the Acoustical Society
of America, 79(3), 826-837.
Wade, T., & Holt, L. L. (2005). Perceptual e ects of pre-
ceding nonspeech rate on temporal properties of speech
categories. Perception & Psychophysics, 67(6), 939-
950.
Willems, L. (1986). Robust formant analysis (IPO Report
No. 529) (pp. 1-25). Eindhoven: Institute for Percep-
tion Research.
Zhang, S., & Meng, Z. (2011). A comparative study on per-
ceptual characteristics of mandarin consonants in dif-
ferent acoustic transmission conditions. In Proceedings
of ICPhS, 2011 (pp. 2296-2299). Hong Kong. Retrieved
from https://www.internationalphoneticassociation.org
Zurek, P. M., & Delhorne, L. A. (1987). Consonant reception
in noise by listeners with mild and moderate sensorineu-
ral hearing impairment. The Journal of the Acoustical
Society of America, 82(5), 1548-1559.