Queen Margaret University logo
    • Login
    View Item 
    •   QMU Repositories
    • eResearch
    • School of Health Sciences
    • CASL
    • View Item
    •   QMU Repositories
    • eResearch
    • School of Health Sciences
    • CASL
    • View Item
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    Relative contributions of feedback and editing in language production: Behavioral & articulatory evidence(A).

    Date
    2005-04
    Author
    McMillan, Corey
    Corley, Martin
    Lickley, Robin
    Hartsuiker, R. J.
    Metadata
    Show full item record
    Citation
    McMillan, C., Corley, M., Lickley, R. & Hartsuiker, R. (2005) Relative contributions of feedback and editing in language production: Behavioral & articulatory evidence(A)., Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, vol. 117, , pp. 2618,
    Abstract
    Psychologists normally attribute the surfacing of phonological speech errors to one of two factors: editing of the speech plan [Levelt (1989)] or feedback between word and phoneme levels [Dell (1986)]. This paper assesses the relative contributions of each factor, focusing on the perception and articulation of elicited speech errors. Experiments one and two measure the likelihood of phonological exchange errors as a function of phonetic similarity [Frisch (1996)], using the SLIP paradigm and a tongue-twister task. Both experiments show that error likelihood increases with phonetic similarity between intended and actual utterance, an effect easy to account for in terms of feedback but not in terms of editing. Experiment three uses EPG to analyze the tongue-twister utterances: many errors occur at the articulatory level but are not easily perceived in the speech signal. Preliminary analysis suggests three patterns of error: (1) substitution of segments, which may be the result of editing; (2) simultaneous double articulation, hypothesized to be the result of residual activation due to feedback; and (3) overlapping double articulation, representing partial execution of one articulation before substitution with another. Taking these findings together, we hope to evaluate the relative contributions of editing and feedback to phonological speech errors.
    URI
    https://eresearch.qmu.ac.uk/handle/20.500.12289/2157
    Collections
    • CASL

    Queen Margaret University: Research Repositories
    Accessibility Statement | Repository Policies | Contact Us | Send Feedback | HTML Sitemap

     

    Browse

    All QMU RepositoriesCommunities & CollectionsBy YearBy PersonBy TitleBy QMU AuthorBy Research CentreThis CollectionBy YearBy PersonBy TitleBy QMU AuthorBy Research Centre

    My Account

    LoginRegister

    Queen Margaret University: Research Repositories
    Accessibility Statement | Repository Policies | Contact Us | Send Feedback | HTML Sitemap