The source of a lexical bias in the Verbal Transformation Effect

Abstract

Comparisons of responses to words and pseudowords gure prominently in our efforts to understand how spoken words are recognised. This was apparent in many of the presentations at the SWAP meeting (e.g., Fowler & Brancazio, 2000;Frauenfelder & Content, 2000). Differences in responding to words and pseudowords are assumed to demonstrate the in uence of lexical memory in the task at hand, from which we infer the structural and functional characteristics of the processing system.Each task we use in this enterprise is often best suited to address a subset of theoretical issues. For example, phoneme detection and identi cation are used most often to examine issues about prelexical processing, such as whether there is lexical feedback and what the structure of phonetic categories is. Lexical decision and other word-based tasks tend to be used to explore the properties of lexical memory. So when a lexical effect is identi ed in an unfamiliar task, it is important to determine what we can learn about word processing from it. This has been the goal of our work into the origin of word-pseudoword differences in the Verbal Transformation Effect (VTE). THE LEXICAL EFFECTThe VTE is an auditory illusion in which listeners report hearing illusory utterances after listening to a word repeat over and over at a rapid rate. Listeners respond on the y, repeating illusory percepts into a microphone.Requests for reprints should be addressed to Mark Pitt,

The Perception-for-Action-Control Theory (PACT): A perceptuo-motor theory of speech perception

“…In a series of works with the VTE, Pitt and colleagues contributed to better specify the VTE methodology, exploiting such ingredients as the number of displayed forms, the time spent on each form, the frequency of switches, etc (Pitt & Shoaf, 2001. They displayed three series of mechanisms at work in the VTE.…”

Visual contribution to the multistable perception of speech

“…This transformation process persists throughout the repetition procedure, leading to perceptual transitions from one speech form to another. Although verbal transformations have mainly been studied as a purely acoustical/auditory effect (e.g., MacKay, Wulf, Yin, & Abrams, 1993;Pitt & Shoaf, 2001Warren, 1961), it has been shown that the effect occurs not only during a purely auditory procedure but also during an overt or covert repetition procedure (Reisberg, Smith, Baxter, & Sonenshine, 1989;Sato, Schwartz, Abry, Cathiard, & Loevenbruck, 2006;Smith, Reisberg, & Wilson, 1995).…”

Multistable syllables as enacted percepts: a source of an asymmetric bias in the verbal transformation effect

“…It has been shown that the number of transformations heard by listeners depends on stimulus length, interstimulus interval, and listening duration (Warren, 1961). Previous studies have reported that perceptual changes to auditory input could range from small phonetic deviations to strong semantic distortions, including substitution of a phoneme by a phonetically close one (Warren, 1961;Warren & Meyers, 1987), auditory streaming/perceptual grouping (Pitt & Shoaf, 2001, and lexical and semantic transformations (Kaminska et al, 2000;Warren, 1961). Lexical and sublexical levels of representation have been suggested as the loci of such effects.…”

“…The classic paradigm consists in presenting participants with an auditory speech stimulus looped on a tape (see, e.g., Kaminska, Pool, & Mayer, 2000;Pitt & Shoaf, 2001Warren, 1961Warren, , 1982Warren & Meyers, 1987). It has been shown that the number of transformations heard by listeners depends on stimulus length, interstimulus interval, and listening duration (Warren, 1961).…”