No data available.
Please log in to see this content.
You have no subscription access to this content.
No metrics data to plot.
The attempt to load metrics for this article has failed.
The attempt to plot a graph for these metrics has failed.
The full text of this article is not currently available.
Effects of phonetically-cued talker variation on semantic encoding
1. Brainerd, C. J. , Stein, L. M. , Silveira, R. A. , Rohenkohl, G. , and Reyna, V. F. (2008). “ How does negative emotion cause false memories?,” Psychol. Sci. 19, 919–925.
4. Gordon, M. (2004). “ New York, Philadelphia and other northern cities,” in A Handbook of Varieties of English. Phonology, edited by E. W. Schneider (Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin), Vol. 1, pp. 282–299.
6. Otgaar, H. , Peters, M. , and Howe, M. L. (2012). “ Dividing attention lowers children's, but increases adults' false memories,” J. Exp. Psychol. Learn. Mem. Cogn. 38, 204–210.
7. Otsuka, S. , and Kawaguchi, J. (2007). “ Divided attention modulates semantic activation: Evidence from a nonletter-level prime task,” Mem. Cogn. 35, 2001–2011.
8. Preston, D. R. (2002). “ Language with an attitude,” in The Handbook of Language Variation and Change, edited by J. K. Chambers, P. Trudgill, and N. Schilling-Estes (Blackwell, Oxford), pp. 40–66.
10. Roediger, H. L. , and McDermott, K. B. (1995). “ Creating false memories: Remembering words not presented in lists,” J. Exp. Psychol. Learn. Mem. Cogn. 24, 803–814.
11. Smith, M. , Bentin, S. , and Spalek, T. (2001). “ Attention constraints of semantic activation during visual word recognition,” J. Exp. Psychol. Learn. Mem. Cogn. 27, 1289–1298.
12. Stadler, M. A. , Roediger, H. L. , and McDermott, K. B. (1999). “ Norms for word lists that create false memories,” Mem. Cogn. 27, 494–500.
13. Sumner, M. (2013). “ A phonetic explanation of pronunciation variant effects,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 133, EL2–EL32.
16. van Orden, G. C. , and Goldinger, S. D. (1994). “ Interdependence of form and function in cognitive systems explains perception of printed words,” J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 20, 1269–1291.
Article metrics loading...
This study reports equivalence in recognition for variable productions of spoken words that differ greatly in frequency. General American (GA) listeners participated in either a semantic priming or a false-memory task, each with three talkers with different accents: GA, New York City (NYC), and Southern Standard British English (BE). GA/BE induced strong semantic priming and low false recall rates. NYC induced no semantic priming but high false recall rates. These results challenge current theory and illuminate encoding-based differences sensitive to phonetically-cued talker variation. The findings highlight the central role of phonetic variation in the spoken word recognition process.
Full text loading...
Most read this month