Assessing segmentation processes by click detection: online measure of statistical learning, or simple interference?

详细信息    查看全文

• 作者：Ana Franco ; Vinciane Gaillard ; Axel Cleeremans…
• 关键词：Statistical learning ; Speech segmentation ; Online measures
• 刊名：Behavior Research Methods
• 出版年：2015
• 出版时间：December 2015
• 年：2015
• 卷：47
• 期：4
• 页码：1393-1403
• 全文大小：531 KB
• 参考文献：Abla, D., Katahira, K., & Okanoya, K. (2008). On-line assessment of statistical learning by event-related potentials. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 20, 952-64. doi:10.-162/?jocn.-008.-0058 CrossRef PubMed
  Aslin, R. N., Saffran, J. R., & Newport, E. L. (1998). Computation of conditional probability statistics by 8-month-old infants. Psychological Science, 9, 321-24. doi:10.-111/-467-9280.-0063 CrossRef
  Bever, T. G., Lackner, J. R., & Stolz, W. (1969). Transitional probability is not a general mechanism for the segmentation of speech. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 79, 387-94.CrossRef
  Boersma, P. (2001). Praat, a system for doing phonetics by computer. Glot International, 5, 341-45.
  Cleeremans, A. (1993). Mechanisms of implicit learning: Connectionist models of sequence processing. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  Cleeremans, A., & McClelland, J. L. (1991). Learning the structure of event sequences. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 120, 235-53. doi:10.-037/-096-3445.-20.-.-35 CrossRef
  Cohen, J. D., MacWhinney, B., Flatt, M., & Provost, J. (1993). PsyScope: A new graphic interactive environment for designing psychology experiments. Behavioral Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 25, 257-71. doi:10.-758/?BF03204507 CrossRef
  Conway, C. M., & Christiansen, M. H. (2001). Sequential learning in non-human primates. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 5, 529-46.CrossRef
  Destrebecqz, A., & Cleeremans, A. (2001). Can sequence learning be implicit? New evidence with the process dissociation procedure. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 8, 343-50. doi:10.-758/?BF03196171 CrossRef
  Dienes, Z. (2008). Understanding psychology as a science: An introduction to scientific and statistical inference. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.
  Dienes, Z. (2011). Bayesian versus orthodox statistics: Which side are you on? Perspectives on Psychological Science, 6, 274-90. doi:10.-177/-745691611406920-/span> CrossRef PubMed
  Dutoit, T. (1997). An introduction to text-to-speech synthesis. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.CrossRef
  Elman, J. L. (1990). Finding structure in time. Cognitive Science, 14, 179-11.CrossRef
  Fiser, J., & Aslin, R. N. (2001). Unsupervised statistical learning of higher-order spatial structures from visual scenes. Psychological Science, 12, 499-04.CrossRef PubMed
  Fiser, J., & Aslin, R. N. (2002). Statistical learning of higher-order temporal structure from visual shape sequences. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 28, 458-67. doi:10.-037/-278-7393.-8.-.-58 PubMed
  Fodor, J. A., & Bever, T. G. (1965). The psychological reality of linguistic segments. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 4, 414-20.CrossRef
  Fodor, J., Bever, T. G., & Garrett, M. (1974). The psychology of language. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
  Frensch, P. A., & Miner, C. S. (1994). Effects of presentation rate and individual differences in short-term memory capacity on an indirect measure of serial learning. Memory & Cognition, 22(1), 95-10.
  Gerken, L. A., & Aslin, R. N. (2005). Thirty years of research on infant speech perception: The legacy of Peter W. Jusczyk. Language Learning and Development, 1, 5-1.CrossRef
  Gómez, D. M., Bion, R. A. H., & Mehler, J. (2011). The word segmentation process as revealed by click detection. Language and Cognitive Processes, 26, 212-23. doi:10.-080/-1690965.-010.-82451 CrossRef
  Kemler Nelson, D. G., Jusczyk, P. W., Mandel, D. R., Myers, J., Turk, A., & Gerken, L. A. (1995). The headturn preference procedure for testing auditory perception. Infant Behavior and Development, 18, 111-16.CrossRef
  Kirkham, N. Z., Slemmer, J. A., & Johnson, S. P. (2002). Visual statistical learning in infancy: Evidence for a domain general learning mechanism. Cognition, 83, B35–B42.CrossRef PubMed
  Mattys, S. L., Jusczyk, P. W., Luce, P. A., & Morgan, J. L. (1999). Phonotactic and prosodic effects on word segmentation in infants. Cognitive Psychology, 38, 465-94.CrossRef PubMed
  Mattys, S. L., White, L., & Melhorn, J. F. (2005). Integration of multiple speech segmentation cues: A hierarchical framework. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 134, 477-00. doi:10.-037/-096-3445.-34.-.-77 CrossRef
  Morgan, J. L. (1994). Converging measures of speech segmentation in preverbal infants. Infant Behavior and Development, 17, 389-03.CrossRef
  Morgan, J. L., & Saffran, J. R. (1995). Emerging integration of sequential and suprasegmental information in preverbal speech segmentation. Child Development, 66, 911-36.CrossRef PubMed
  Nissen, M. J., & Bullemer, P. (1987). Attentional requirement of learning: Evidence from performance measures. Cognitive Psychology, 19, 1-2. doi:10.-016/-010-0285(87)90002-8 CrossRef
  Perruchet, P., & Amorim, M.-A. (1992). Conscious knowledge and changes in performance in sequence learning: Evidence against dissociation. Journa
• 作者单位：Ana Franco (1) (2)
  Vinciane Gaillard (1) (2)
  Axel Cleeremans (1) (2)
  Arnaud Destrebecqz (1) (2)
  
  1. Cognition, Consciousness and Computation Group, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium
  2. Center for Research in Cognition & Neurosciences, Université Libre de Bruxelles, 50 Avenue F.-D. Roosevelt, 1050, Bruxelles, Belgium
  
• 刊物主题：Cognitive Psychology;
• 出版者：Springer US
• ISSN：1554-3528

文摘

Statistical learning can be used to extract the words from continuous speech. Gómez, Bion, and Mehler (Language and Cognitive Processes, 26, 212-23, 2011) proposed an online measure of statistical learning: They superimposed auditory clicks on a continuous artificial speech stream made up of a random succession of trisyllabic nonwords. Participants were instructed to detect these clicks, which could be located either within or between words. The results showed that, over the length of exposure, reaction times (RTs) increased more for within-word than for between-word clicks. This result has been accounted for by means of statistical learning of the between-word boundaries. However, even though statistical learning occurs without an intention to learn, it nevertheless requires attentional resources. Therefore, this process could be affected by a concurrent task such as click detection. In the present study, we evaluated the extent to which the click detection task indeed reflects successful statistical learning. Our results suggest that the emergence of RT differences between within- and between-word click detection is neither systematic nor related to the successful segmentation of the artificial language. Therefore, instead of being an online measure of learning, the click detection task seems to interfere with the extraction of statistical regularities. Keywords Statistical learning Speech segmentation Online measures