The role of attention in infant phonetic perception
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Attention is an important factor underlying phonetic perception that is not well understood. In this study we examined the role of auditory attention in infant phonetic perception using a distraction masker paradigm. We tested infant discrimination of /bu/ vs /gu/ with a habituation procedure and three natural productions of each syllable. For the quiet condition each token was copied into a separate sound file. For the distractor condition, a high frequency noise was added to each sound file so that it gated on and off with the onset and offset of the syllable. The distractor noise was a recording of bird and cricket songs whose frequencies did NOT overlap with the test syllables. Thus, the noise did not change the audibility of the syllable, but it could distract infants if they do not focus their attention well. Infants (6- to 8-month-olds) were tested in each condition. Infants tested in quiet performed significantly better than infants tested in the distractor condition; discrimination scores showed little overlap between the two groups. These findings indicate that in young infants, attention to subtle phonetic differences is easily disrupted. The implications for developmental models of speech perception will be discussed.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".