Linguistic experience and audio-visual perception of non-native fricatives
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examined the effects of linguistic experience on audio-visual (AV) perception of non-native (L2) speech. Canadian English natives and Mandarin Chinese natives differing in degree of English exposure [long and short length of residence (LOR) in Canada] were presented with English fricatives of three visually distinct places of articulation: interdentals nonexistent in Mandarin and labiodentals and alveolars common in both languages. Stimuli were presented in quiet and in a cafe-noise background in four ways: audio only (A), visual only (V), congruent AV (AVc), and incongruent AV (AVi). Identification results showed that overall performance was better in the AVc than in the A or V condition and better in quiet than in cafe noise. While the Mandarin long LOR group approximated the native English patterns, the short LOR group showed poorer interdental identification, more reliance on visual information, and greater AV-fusion with the AVi materials, indicating the failure of L2 visual speech category formation with the short LOR non-natives and the positive effects of linguistic experience with the long LOR non-natives. These results point to an integrated network in AV speech processing as a function of linguistic background and provide evidence to extend auditory-based L2 speech learning theories to the visual domain.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".