Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Automaticity in speech perception: some speech/nonspeech comparisons

K Johnson1, J V Ralston

  • 1Department of Linguistics, Ohio State University, Columbus 43210-1298.

Phonetica
|January 1, 1994
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Induction of psychogenic nonepileptic seizures without placebo.

Neurology·2001
Same author

Alloimmunization in preterm infants after repeated transfusions of WBC-reduced RBCs from the same donor.

Transfusion·2001
Same author

A feline model of experimentally induced islet amyloidosis.

The American journal of pathology·2000
Same author

Acoustic vowel reduction in Creek: effects of distinctive length and position in the word.

Phonetica·2000
Same author

A method for the automated mapping of laboratory results to LOINC.

Proceedings. AMIA Symposium·2000
Same author

Magnetic resonance imaging of intramural haematoma of the ascending aorta in Marfan's syndrome.

Clinical radiology·2000
Same journal

Comparing the roles of f0, speech rate, and timbre in expressing and perceiving politeness in Mandarin speech.

Phonetica·2026
Same journal

Speech prosody: from acoustics to interpretation.

Phonetica·2026
Same journal

What determines the success of AI voice-cloned speech? Prosodic and acoustic evidence on three TTS systems.

Phonetica·2026
Same journal

The effects of native phonotactic experience, cross-language perceptual similarity, and non-native phonological merger on Mandarin speakers' perception of Cantonese syllable-final segments.

Phonetica·2026
Same journal

Variation and change in the production of te reo Māori closing vowel sequences.

Phonetica·2026
Same journal

Overcoming stress deafness: the interplay of musical acuity and L2 proficiency in Czech learners' perception of English stress.

Phonetica·2026
See all related articles

Speech perception is an automatic process, unlike general auditory perception. This study used sine-wave speech analogs to show that speech perception is faster and obligatory, suggesting specialized brain mechanisms.

Area of Science:

  • Auditory Neuroscience
  • Psychoacoustics
  • Speech Science

Background:

  • Speech perception is often considered a specialized cognitive function.
  • The automaticity of speech perception compared to general auditory processing is not fully understood.
  • Sine-wave speech analogs provide a controlled method to investigate auditory perception.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To investigate differences between speech and general auditory perception.
  • To test the hypothesis that speech perception is an automatized process.
  • To explore the mechanisms underlying speech perception using controlled auditory stimuli.

Main Methods:

  • Three experiments using sine-wave replicas of speech sounds.
  • Comparison of categorization and discrimination tasks for speech and nonspeech listeners.

Related Experiment Videos

  • Analysis of identification functions, reaction times, and context effects.

    • Main Results:

    • Speech listeners showed categorical perception of initial consonant transitions (/wa/-/ya/), unlike nonspeech listeners.
    • Differences in identification function slopes, reaction times, and context effects were observed between speech and nonspeech listeners for final glides.
    • Nonspeech listeners exhibited greater discrimination sensitivity than speech listeners.

    Conclusions:

    • Speech perception appears to be an automatic, obligatory, and fast perceptual mechanism.
    • These findings support the hypothesis that speech perception is a specialized and automatized cognitive process.
    • The results suggest distinct neural pathways for speech and general auditory processing.