Oct 2, 2014

2014/10/02

Dahan, D., Drucker, S. J., & Scarborough, R. A. (2008) Talker adaptation in speech perception: Adjusting the signal or the representations? Cognition 108, 710–718.  

Presentation: Sarah
Summary: Thomas

Talker variability can easily be adapted by human listeners. Studies have been done to investigate how listeners accomplish the adaptation. Two approaches have been proposed concerning this issue. Advocates for the normalization approach believe that when listeners encounter variations in speech, they change the normalization algorithm, adjust the incoming signal, and map the adjusted signal onto the mental representation. On the other hand, supporters of the representation approach hold the view that variations leave memory traces, and the representations in the lexicon are adjusted accordingly. The goal of the present study is to tease apart the predictions that can be made with these two approaches. The target of this study is the raising of the vowel /æ/ before /g/ in words such as bag. In the first experiment, two groups of participants listened to normal bag-type words and raised bag-type words respectively, and then their identification of back-type words was tested in an eye-tracking experiment. The rationale is that if the adaptation to the raised bag-type words facilitates the identification of the back-type words, the representation approach is supported rather than the normalization approach, according to which, adaptation on the bag-type variations should not have affected the adjustment of the signal of the back-type words. However, for the representation approach, it is possible that the competition between bag and back interpretations can be mitigated because of an adaptation to the raised-bag stimuli that widens the differences between these two words. This is exactly what the authors found: the group of listeners adapted to the raised bag-type words identifies back-types faster than the group that listened to the normal bag-type words. A second experiment of a within-subject design replicated the finding. The authors conclude that adaptation to speech signals involves more than adjustment on the incoming signal. Dynamic adjustment of the representation in the lexicon also occurs as listeners cope with speech variations.