skip to main content
US FlagAn official website of the United States government
dot gov icon
Official websites use .gov
A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
https lock icon
Secure .gov websites use HTTPS
A lock ( lock ) or https:// means you've safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Explore Research Products in the PAR
It may take a few hours for recently added research products to appear in PAR search results.


Title: Lexical Feedback in the Time-Invariant String Kernel (TISK) Model of Spoken Word Recognition
The Time-Invariant String Kernel (TISK) model of spoken word recognition (Hannagan, Magnuson & Grainger, 2013; You & Magnuson, 2018) is an interactive activation model with many similarities to TRACE (McClelland & Elman, 1986). However, by replacing most time-specific nodes in TRACE with time-invariant open-diphone nodes, TISK uses orders of magnitude fewer nodes and connections than TRACE. Although TISK performed remarkably similarly to TRACE in simulations reported by Hannagan et al., the original TISK implementation did not include lexical feedback, precluding simulation of top-down effects, and leaving open the possibility that adding feedback to TISK might fundamentally alter its performance. Here, we demonstrate that when lexical feedback is added to TISK, it gains the ability to simulate top-down effects without losing the ability to simulate the fundamental phenomena tested by Hannagan et al. Furthermore, with feedback, TISK demonstrates graceful degradation when noise is added to input, although parameters can be found that also promote (less) graceful degradation without feedback. We review arguments for and against feedback in cognitive architectures, and conclude that feedback provides a computationally efficient basis for robust constraint-based processing.  more » « less
Award ID(s):
2043903
PAR ID:
10509557
Author(s) / Creator(s):
; ;
Publisher / Repository:
Ubiquity Press / European Society for Cognitive Psychology
Date Published:
Journal Name:
Journal of Cognition
Volume:
7
Issue:
1
ISSN:
2514-4820
Page Range / eLocation ID:
1-23
Subject(s) / Keyword(s):
Computational models neural networks spoken word recognition interaction feedback
Format(s):
Medium: X
Sponsoring Org:
National Science Foundation
More Like this
  1. ; (, Proceedings of the Cognitive Science Society)
    The Time-Invariant String Kernel (TISK) model of spoken word recognition (Hanngan et al., 2013) is an interactive activation model like TRACE (McClelland & Elman, 1986). However, it uses orders of magnitude fewer nodes and connections because it replaces TRACE's time-specific duplicates of phoneme and word nodes with time-invariant nodes based on a string kernel representation (essentially a phoneme-by-phoneme matrix, where a word is encoded as by all ordered open diphones it contains; e.g., cat has /kæ/, /æt/, and /kt/). Hannagan et al. (2013) showed that TISK behaves similarly to TRACE in the time course of phonological competition and even word-specific recognition times. However, the original implementation did not include feedback from words to diphone nodes, precluding simulation of top-down effects. Here, we demonstrate that TISK can be easily adapted to lexical feedback, affording simulation of top-down effects as well as allowing the model to demonstrate graceful degradation given noisy inputs. 
    more » « less
  2. ; ; ; ; (, Cognition)
    Whether top-down feedback modulates perception has deep implications for cognitive theories. Debate has been vigorous in the domain of spoken word recognition, where competing computational models and agreement on at least one diagnostic experimental paradigm suggest that the debate may eventually be resolvable. Norris and Cutler (2021) revisit arguments against lexical feedback in spoken word recognition models. They also incorrectly claim that recent computational demonstrations that feedback promotes accuracy and speed under noise (Magnuson et al., 2018) were due to the use of the Luce choice rule rather than adding noise to inputs (noise was in fact added directly to inputs). They also claim that feedback cannot improve word recognition because feedback cannot distinguish signal from noise. We have two goals in this paper. First, we correct the record about the simulations of Magnuson et al. (2018). Second, we explain how interactive activation models selectively sharpen signals via joint effects of feedback and lateral inhibition that boost lexically-coherent sublexical patterns over noise. We also review a growing body of behavioral and neural results consistent with feedback and inconsistent with autonomous (non-feedback) architectures, and conclude that parsimony supports feedback. We close by discussing the potential for synergy between autonomous and interactive approaches. 
    more » « less
  3. ; ; ; (, Cognitive Science)
    Abstract We recently reported strong, replicable (i.e., replicated) evidence forlexically mediated compensation for coarticulation(LCfC; Luthra et al., 2021), whereby lexical knowledge influences a prelexical process. Critically, evidence for LCfC provides robust support forinteractivemodels of cognition that includetop‐down feedbackand is inconsistent withautonomousmodels that allow only feedforward processing. McQueen, Jesse, and Mitterer (2023) offer five counter‐arguments against our interpretation; we respond to each of those arguments here and conclude that top‐down feedback provides the most parsimonious explanation of extant data. 
    more » « less
  4. ; ; ; ; (, Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society)
    We follow up on recent work demonstrating clear advantages of lexical-to-sublexical feedback in the TRACE model of spoken word recognition. The prior work compared accuracy and recognition times in TRACE with feedback on or off as progressively more noise was added to inputs. Recognition times were faster with feedback at every level of noise, and there was an accuracy advantage for feedback with noise added to inputs. However, a recent article claims that those results must be an artifact of converting activations to response probabilities, because feedback could only reinforce the “status quo.” That is, the claim is that given noisy inputs, feedback must reinforce all inputs equally, whether driven by signal or noise. We demonstrate that the feedback advantage replicates with raw activations. We also demonstrate that lexical feedback selectively reinforces lexically-coherent input patterns – that is, signal over noise – and explain how that behavior emerges naturally in interactive activation. 
    more » « less
  5. ; ; ; ; (, Psychonomic Bulletin & Review)
    null (Ed.)
    Abstract Pervasive behavioral and neural evidence for predictive processing has led to claims that language processing depends upon predictive coding. Formally, predictive coding is a computational mechanism where only deviations from top-down expectations are passed between levels of representation. In many cognitive neuroscience studies, a reduction of signal for expected inputs is taken as being diagnostic of predictive coding. In the present work, we show that despite not explicitly implementing prediction, the TRACE model of speech perception exhibits this putative hallmark of predictive coding, with reductions in total lexical activation, total lexical feedback, and total phoneme activation when the input conforms to expectations. These findings may indicate that interactive activation is functionally equivalent or approximant to predictive coding or that caution is warranted in interpreting neural signal reduction as diagnostic of predictive coding. 
    more » « less
  • Citation Formats
  • MLA
  • APA
  • Chicago
  • BibTeX
  • Save / Share this Record
  • Send to Email