Can kiwis and koalas as cultural primes induce perceptual bias in Australian English speaking listeners?

Abstract

The presence of culturally significant objects has been shown to induce biases in speech perception consistent with features of the dialect relevant to the object. Questions remain about the transferability of this effect to different dialect contexts, and the efficacy of the task in inducing the effect. This paper details an Australian-context experiment modelled on Hay and Drager's (2010) New Zealand-context stuffed toy study. Seventy-five listeners heard spoken Australian English (AusE) phrases with phrase-final monosyllabic words containing either kit, dress, or trap vowels. Each phrase was followed by audio presentation of a six-step synthesized vowel continuum, from New Zealand English (NZE)-like to exaggerated AusE-like tokens. Listeners attempted to match one of the synthesized variants to the speaker's realization of the target vowel. Listeners were exposed to one of two priming conditions, established by stuffed toy kiwis (New Zealand) and stuffed toy koalas (Australia), or a control condition (no toy). Contrary to Hay and Drager (2010), token selections did not differ significantly between the New Zealand and Australian priming conditions. However, reversing the order of continuum presentation did significantly affect token selection for kit vowels, raising questions about the task design itself. Results suggest that the influence of regional primes on speech perception may be more limited than previously thought.

Implicit effects of regional cues on the interpretation of intonation by Corsican French listeners

“…Specifically, a typical Continental French speaker, whose input is strongly dominated by Continental French with perhaps a high familiarity but limited exposure to Corsican French, is expected to show an effect that is weak and therefore difficult to detect. This closely echoes the findings by Lawrence (2015) and Walker et al (2019) that speakers of more dominant varieties did not show an effect of regional cue even though speakers from regions with more balanced input previously had.…”

“…In the first case, Lawrence (2015) replicated the design of Niedzielski (1999) and Hay et al (2006aHay et al ( , 2006b) in a British context, where the listeners were speakers of Standard Southern British English and the phonetic variation concerned vowel differences between that variety and Northern British English. In the second case, Walker et al (2019) replicated the specific design of , but in an Australian context with Australian listeners, and found no effect of the regionally indexed stuffed toys. As Walker et al (2019) point out, such evidence suggests that the extent to which regional cues influence perception depends on the specific details of the sociolinguistic context involved.…”

“…In the second case, Walker et al (2019) replicated the specific design of , but in an Australian context with Australian listeners, and found no effect of the regionally indexed stuffed toys. As Walker et al (2019) point out, such evidence suggests that the extent to which regional cues influence perception depends on the specific details of the sociolinguistic context involved. Crucially, for both replication studies, there was a potential asymmetry in terms of the linguistic and cultural dominance of the regions involved, and therefore also in terms of the degree of each group's exposure to the 'other' regional variety.…”

“…Corsican French listeners are not only familiar with Continental French but are in a context where that variety in fact dominates a number of important sources of linguistic input. Unlike the Australian listeners in Walker et al (2019) then, the listeners in the present study are unlikely to fall below any minimum threshold for exposure that would prevent them from being behaviorally sensitive to regional cues or linguistic differences. Conversely, while Continental French listeners may be familiar with Corsican French, they generally have limited exposure to it and are therefore predicted to be less likely to show an effect of regional cue, though we do not test that specific hypothesis in the present study.…”

“…In the case of Walker et al's (2019) study, for example, it is likely that New Zealand individuals are exposed to Australian English to a greater degree than Australians are to New Zealand English as a result of, for example, greater output and distribution of Australian media in New Zealand as compared to the other way around. Walker et al (2019) in fact measured listeners' degree of exposure to and familiarity with New Zealand English, though this factor did not significantly interact with the regional cue manipulation. The authors offer various interpretations of the lack of both a main effect and an effect of exposure, including the possibility that the Australian listeners' average exposure to New Zealand English is simply too low to result in a detectable effect on behavior.…”