Infants' discrimination of consonant contrasts in the presence and absence of talker variability
Name:
QuamCloughKnightGerkenInfancy- ...
Size:
450.0Kb
Format:
PDF
Description:
Final Accepted Manuscript
Affiliation
Univ Arizona, Dept Speech Language & Hearing SciUniv Arizona, Dept Psychol
Univ Arizona, Dept Educ Psychol
Univ Arizona, Dept Linguist
Univ Arizona, Dept Psychiat
Issue Date
2020-10-16
Metadata
Show full item recordPublisher
WILEYCitation
Quam, C., Clough, L., Knight, S., & Gerken, L. (2020). Infants' discrimination of consonant contrasts in the presence and absence of talker variability. Infancy.Journal
INFANCYRights
© 2020 International Congress of Infant Studies.Collection Information
This item from the UA Faculty Publications collection is made available by the University of Arizona with support from the University of Arizona Libraries. If you have questions, please contact us at repository@u.library.arizona.edu.Abstract
To learn speech‐sound categories, infants must identify the acoustic dimensions that differentiate categories and selectively attend to them as opposed to irrelevant dimensions. Variability on irrelevant acoustic dimensions can aid formation of robust categories in infants through adults in tasks such as word learning (e.g., Rost and McMurray, 2009) or speech‐sound learning (e.g., Lively et al., 1993). At the same time, variability sometimes overwhelms learners, interfering with learning and processing. Two prior studies (Kuhl & Miller, 1982; Jusczyk, Pisoni, & Mullennix, 1992) found that irrelevant variability sometimes impaired early sound discrimination. We asked whether variability would impair or facilitate discrimination for older infants, comparing 7.5‐month‐old infants' discrimination of an early acquired native contrast, /p/ vs. /b/ (in the word forms /pIm/ vs. /bIm/), in Experiment 1, with an acoustically subtle, non‐native contrast, /n/ vs. /ŋ/ (in /nIm/ vs. /ŋIm/), in Experiment 2. Words were spoken by one or four talkers. Infants discriminated the native but not the non‐native contrast, and there were no significant effects of talker condition. We discuss implications for theories of phonological learning and avenues for future research.Note
12 month embargo; first published 16 October 2020ISSN
1525-0008EISSN
1532-7078PubMed ID
33063948Version
Final accepted manuscriptae974a485f413a2113503eed53cd6c53
10.1111/infa.12371