Multiple phonemic restorations follow the rules for auditory induction

Auditory induction: Reciprocal changes in alternating sounds

“…As with auditory induction of tones, loudness reduction of the inducer was an asymmetrical function of frequency separation, with a greater change occurring when the noise inducer had lower frequencies than did the speech inducee (inducee/inducer values of +0.5 and + 1.0, octaves, as shown in Figure 8), in keeping with the greater upward spread of neural activity along the basilar membrane produced by the inducer (see Warren et al, 1972). This spectral asymmetry was also observed when the limiting conditions for full restoration of narrowband speech by narrowband noise were determined (Bashford et al, 1992;Bashford & Warren, 1979, 1987). 3 The observations described above are supported by statistical analyses.…”

“…It has been suggested that phonemic restorations represent a verbal form of auditory induction that is subject to the same basic rules as those governing the restoration of nonverbal sounds, but which also involves the application of linguistic skills that enable listeners to employ intact portions of the signals to identify and synthesize missing segments (Warren et al, 1972;Warren & Sherman, 1974). In keeping with this suggestion, it has been reported that the spectral relations of inducer and inducee required for restoration of speech sounds matched those required for nonverbal restoration (Bashford, Riener, & Warren, 1992;Bashford & Warren, 1979, 1987. Although Bregman (1990) has agreed that restoration of tones involves an allocation of some of the inducer's neural response to the inducee, he has hypothesized that phonemic restorations are fundamentally different, representing a "schemadriven stream segregation" in which no such reallocation occurs (p. 372).…”

“…A series of studies has been undertaken to test the validity of this suggestion. These studies have found that, in keeping with the spectral requirements for nonverbal auditory induction, the greatest increase in apparent continuity of narrowband speech passages interrupted periodically by narrowband noise occurred when the center frequencies of the speech and noise bands were the same (Bashford & Warren, 1979, 1987, and also that the intelligibility of narrowband sentences was greatest when the interrupting noise bands matched the center frequency of the speech (Bashford et al, 1992). Bregman (1990) has suggested that phonemic restoration represents a "schema-driven stream segregation" that is fundamentally different from the auditory induction of nonverbal sounds such as tones and noises.…”

“…Sentences filtered . in this fashion are fully intelligible and demonstrate phonemic restoration when interrupted by noise (Bashford et al, 1992;Bashford & Warren, 1979, 1987. The same filtering apparatus was used for generating the five inducers, which were YJ-octave bands of Gaussian noise.…”

Spoken Word Recognition and Production

“…Their judg ments of the location of the noise are imperfect, but the limits of illu sory continuity correspond roughly to average word duration (Bashford, Meyers, Brubaker, & Warren, 1988;Bashford & Warren, 1987), suggesting that oncc lcxical information is available, it supplants lower-level informa tion. Samuel (1981a) compared listeners' judgments when noise actually replaced a phoneme (as it did in Warren's stimuli) or was overlaid on a phoneme (as listeners reported).…”