More Like this

1. Marking prominence: Towards cue-based annotation of prosodic prominence

   Brugos, A. (January 2023, International Congress of Phonetic Sciences)

   Phrase-level prosodic prominence in American English is understood, in the AM tradition, to be marked by pitch accents. While such prominences are characterized via tonal labels in ToBI (e.g. H*), their cues are not exclusively in the pitch domain: timing, loudness and voice quality are known to contribute to prominence perception. All of these cues occur with a wide degree of variability in naturally produced speech, and this variation may be informative. In this study, we advance towards a system of explicit labelling of individual cues to prosodic structure, here focusing on phrase-level prominence. We examine correlations between the presence of a set of 6 cues to prominence (relating to segment duration, loudness, and non-modal phonation, in addition to f0) and pitch accent labels in a corpus of ToBI-labelled American English speech. Results suggest that tokens with more cues are more likely to receive a pitch accent label. 

   more » « less
2. National nanotechnology research prominence

   Porter, A.L.; Garner, J.; Newman, N.C.; Carley, S.F.; Youtie, J.; Kwon, S.; Li, Y. (January 2018, Technology analysis & strategic management)

   https://doi.org/10.1080/09537325.2018.1480013 published online 

   more » « less
3. How prosodic prominence influences fricative spectra in English

   https://doi.org/10.21437/SpeechProsody.2020-38  

   Barnes, Jonathan; Brugos, Alejna; Shattuck-Hufnagel, Stefanie; Veilleux, Nanette (May 2020, Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Speech Prosody 2020)
4. Productivity, prominence, and the effects of academic environment

   https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1817431116  

   Way, Samuel F.; Morgan, Allison C.; Larremore, Daniel B.; Clauset, Aaron (May 2019, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences)

   Faculty at prestigious institutions produce more scientific papers, receive more citations and scholarly awards, and are typically trained at more-prestigious institutions than faculty with less prestigious appointments. This imbalance is often attributed to a meritocratic system that sorts individuals into more-prestigious positions according to their reputation, past achievements, and potential for future scholarly impact. Here, we investigate the determinants of scholarly productivity and measure their dependence on past training and current work environments. To distinguish the effects of these environments, we apply a matched-pairs experimental design to career and productivity trajectories of 2,453 early-career faculty at all 205 PhD-granting computer science departments in the United States and Canada, who together account for over 200,000 publications and 7.4 million citations. Our results show that the prestige of faculty’s current work environment, not their training environment, drives their future scientific productivity, while current and past locations drive prominence. Furthermore, the characteristics of a work environment are more predictive of faculty productivity and impact than mechanisms representing preferential selection or retention of more-productive scholars by more-prestigious departments. These results identify an environmental mechanism for cumulative advantage, in which an individual’s past successes are “locked in” via placement into a more prestigious environment, which directly facilitates future success. The scientific productivity of early-career faculty is thus driven by where they work, rather than where they trained for their doctorate, indicating a limited role for doctoral prestige in predicting scientific contributions. 

   more » « less
5. Productivity, prominence, and the effects of academic environment

   Way, Samuel F; Morgan, Allison C; Larremore, Daniel B; Clauset, Aaron (January 2019, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America)