vowel production overlaps significantly - no one to one corrrespondence
1 of 14
Sharma & Dorman (1999)
da or ta unambiguously defined as one or the other despite being on a continuum
2 of 14
Naatanen (1978)
oddball paradigm
3 of 14
Molholm et al (2005)
different brain areas track different beep tones
4 of 14
Sharma & Dorman (1999)
can brain strack phonemes? da vs ta vs ta (VOT all 20 apart) - MMN reponse between category but not within - coding of linguistic, not physical properties
5 of 14
Liberman et al (1967)
type of analysis by synthesis model - motor theory - perception viewed through production of speaker's motor gesture (invariant) - mirror neurons
6 of 14
Moineau et al (1985)
Broca's aphasia? deficit in production but normal comprehension
7 of 14
Marslen-Wilson (1987)
The cohort model - hear speech, create cohort, reduce as we hear more of the word - can recognise before word is finished
8 of 14
McClelland and Elman (1986)
Trace model - emphasises role of top-down regulation - connectionist model
9 of 14
Ganong (1980)
perception of ambiguous phoneme biased to yield a word
10 of 14
Warren and warren (1970)
phoneme restoration depends on context of sentence
11 of 14
McGurk & MacDonald (1976)
visual cues
12 of 14
Dupoux et al (1999)
japanese do not perceive difference between word egma (illicit) and eguma
13 of 14
Dehaene-Lambertz et al (2000)
oddball paradigm - japanese auditory cortex does not detect difference
14 of 14
Other cards in this set
Card 2
Front
da or ta unambiguously defined as one or the other despite being on a continuum
Back
Sharma & Dorman (1999)
Card 3
Front
oddball paradigm
Back
Card 4
Front
different brain areas track different beep tones
Back
Card 5
Front
can brain strack phonemes? da vs ta vs ta (VOT all 20 apart) - MMN reponse between category but not within - coding of linguistic, not physical properties
Comments
No comments have yet been made