Stuffed toys and speech perception
Previous research has shown that speech perception can be influenced by a speaker's social characteristics, including the expected dialect area of the speaker (Niedzielski, Journal of Language and Social Psychology 18: 62–85, 1999; Hay et al. The Linguistic Review 23: 351–379, 2006a). This article reports on an experiment designed to test to degree to which exposure to the concept of a region can also influence perception. In order to invoke the concept, we exposed participants, who were all speakers of New Zealand English, to either stuffed toy kangaroos and koalas (associated with Australia) or stuffed toy kiwis (associated with New Zealand). Participants then completed a perception task in which they matched natural vowels produced by a male New Zealander to vowels from a synthesized continuum which ranged from raised and fronted Australian-like tokens to lowered and centralized New Zealand-like tokens. Our results indicate that perception of the vowels shifted depending on which set of toys the participants had seen. This supports models of speech perception in which linguistic and nonlinguistic information are intricately entwined.
Related papers
Sharing this paper's topic and concept tags, via OpenAlex. These aren't in Graze — they link straight out to the source.
The Effect of Social Information on the Perception of Sociolinguistic Variables
Nancy A. Niedzielski · Journal of Language and Social Psychology · 1999
From fush to feesh: Exemplar priming in speech perception
Jennifer B. Hay, Aaron Nolan, Katie Drager · The Linguistic Review · 2006
Can kiwis and koalas as cultural primes induce perceptual bias in Australian English speaking listeners?
Michael Walker, Anita Szakay, Felicity Cox · Laboratory Phonology Journal of the Association for Laboratory Phonology · 2019
Regional priming in Australian English KIT, DRESS and TRAP vowels
Walker, Michael Stuart · Figshare · 2017
0 Comments
The summary above is machine-written and the abstract is the authors' own pitch. This is where people who read the paper say what it actually found, what the summary missed, and which part is worth your time.
Log in to join the discussion.