An official website of the United States government
Recent work on perceptual learning for speech has suggested that while high-variability training typically results in generalization, low-variability exposure can sometimes be sufficient for cross-talker generalization. We tested predictions of a similarity-based account, according to which, generalization depends on training-test talker similarity rather than on exposure to variability. We compared perceptual adaptation to second-language (L2) speech following single- or multiple-talker training with a round-robin design in which four L2 English talkers from four different first-language (L1) backgrounds served as both training and test talkers. After exposure to 60 L2 English sentences in one training session, cross-talker/cross-accent generalization was possible (but not guaranteed) following either multiple- or single-talker training with variation across training-test talker pairings. Contrary to predictions of the similarity-based account, adaptation was not consistently better for identical than for mismatched training-test talker pairings, and generalization patterns were asymmetrical across training-test talker pairs. Acoustic analyses also revealed a dissociation between phonetic similarity and cross-talker/cross-accent generalization. Notably, variation in adaptation and generalization related to variation in training phase intelligibility. Together with prior evidence, these data suggest that perceptual learning for speech may benefit from some combination of exposure to talker variability, training-test similarity, and high training phase intelligibility.
more »
« less
This content will become publicly available on May 21, 2026
Comparing lower and higher variability multi-talker perceptual training
One of the main challenges individuals face when learning an additional language (L2) is learning its sound system, which includes learning to perceive L2 sounds accurately. High variability phonetic training (HVPT) is one method that has proven highly effective at helping individuals develop robust L2 perceptual categories, and recent meta-analytic work suggests that multi-talker training conditions provide a small but statistically reliable benefit compared to single-talker training. However, no study has compared lower and higher variability multi-talker conditions to determine how the number of talkers affects training outcomes, even though such information can shed additional light on how talker variability affects phonetic training. In this study, we randomly assigned 458 L2 Spanish learners to a two-talker or six-talker HVPT group or to a control group that did not receive HVPT. Training focused on L2 Spanish stops. We tested performance on trained talkers and words as well as several forms of generalization. The experimental groups improved more and demonstrated greater generalization than the control group, but neither experimental group outpaced the other. The number of sessions experimental participants completed moderated learning gains.
more »
« less
- PAR ID:
- 10632464
- Publisher / Repository:
- Cambridge University Press
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Applied Psycholinguistics
- Volume:
- 46
- ISSN:
- 0142-7164
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
Previous research suggests that learning to use a phonetic property [e.g., voice-onset-time, (VOT)] for talker identity supports a left ear processing advantage. Specifically, listeners trained to identify two “talkers” who only differed in characteristic VOTs showed faster talker identification for stimuli presented to the left ear compared to that presented to the right ear, which is interpreted as evidence of hemispheric lateralization consistent with task demands. Experiment 1 ( n = 97) aimed to replicate this finding and identify predictors of performance; experiment 2 ( n = 79) aimed to replicate this finding under conditions that better facilitate observation of laterality effects. Listeners completed a talker identification task during pretest, training, and posttest phases. Inhibition, category identification, and auditory acuity were also assessed in experiment 1. Listeners learned to use VOT for talker identity, which was positively associated with auditory acuity. Talker identification was not influenced by ear of presentation, and Bayes factors indicated strong support for the null. These results suggest that talker-specific phonetic variation is not sufficient to induce a left ear advantage for talker identification; together with the extant literature, this instead suggests that hemispheric lateralization for talker-specific phonetic variation requires phonetic variation to be conditioned on talker differences in source characteristics.more » « less
-
Unfamiliar accents can cause word recognition challenges, particularly in noisy environments, but few studies have incorporated quantitative pronunciation distance metrics to explain intelligibility differences across accents. To address this gap, intelligibility was measured for 18 talkers -- two from each of three first-language, one bilingual, and five second-language accents -- in quiet and two noise conditions. The relations between two edit distance metrics, which quantify phonetic differences from a reference accent, and intelligibility scores were assessed. Intelligibility was quantified through both fuzzy string matching and percent words correct. Both edit distance metrics were significantly related to intelligibility scores; a heuristic edit distance metric was the best predictor of intelligibility for both scoring methods. Further, there were stronger effects of edit distance as the listening condition increased in difficulty. Talker accent also contributed substantially to intelligibility models, but relations between accent and edit distance did not consistently pattern for the two talkers representing each accent. Frequency of production differences in vowels and consonants was negatively correlated with intelligibility, particularly for consonants. Together, these results suggest that significant amounts of variability in intelligibility across accents can be predicted by phonetic differences from the listener’s home accent. However, talker- and accent-specific pronunciation features, including suprasegmental characteristics, must be quantified to fully explain intelligibility across talkers and listening conditions.more » « less
-
Abstract There is considerable lab‐based evidence for successful incidental learning, in which a learner's attention is directed away from the to‐be‐learned stimulus and towards another stimulus. In this study, we extend incidental learning research into the language learning classroom. Three groups of adult second language (L2) learners (N= 52) engaged in structured classroom Mandarin learning took part in an 8‐week study. One group served as a classroom‐only control group. The second group underwent additional intentional auditory training involving Mandarin speech and explicit feedback. The third group underwent additional incidental learning combined with nonspeech “perceptual building block” categories—categories that share critical perceptual dimensions with target L2 speech categories but that are not perceived as speech. We demonstrate that when supplemented with structured classroom learning, incidental learning involving nonspeech analogs promotes phonetic, category, and word learning equivalent to learning from more traditional intentional auditory training.more » « less
-
When listeners encounter a difficult-to-understand talker in a difficult-to-understand situation, their perceptual mechanisms can adapt, making the talker in the situation easier to understand. This study examined talker-specific perceptual adaptation experimentally by embedding speech from second-language (L2) English talkers in varying levels of noise and collecting transcriptions from first-language English listeners (ten talkers, 100 listeners per experiment). Experiments 1 and 2 demonstrated that prior experience with a L2 talker's speech presented first without noise and then with gradually increasing levels of noise facilitated recognition of that talker in loud noise. Experiment 3 tested whether adaptation is driven by tuning-in to the talker's voice and speech patterns, by examining recognition of speech-in-loud-noise following experience with the talker in quiet. Finally, experiment 4 tested whether adaptation is driven by tuning-out the background noise, by measuring speech-in-loud-noise recognition after experience with the talker in consistently loud noise. The results showed that both tuning-in to the talker and tuning-out the noise contribute to talker-specific perceptual adaptation to L2 speech-in-noise.more » « less
