The Role of Fundamental Frequency in Phonetic Accommodation
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Previous research has argued that fundamental frequency is a critical component of phonetic accommodation. We tested this hypothesis in an auditory naming task with two conditions. Participants in an unfiltered condition completed an auditory naming task with a single male model talker. A second group of participants was assigned to a filtered condition where the same stimuli had been high-pass filtered at 300 Hz, thereby eliminating the fundamental frequency. Acoustic analysis of f0 revealed that participants assigned to the unfiltered condition imitated the pitch of the model talker more than those assigned to the filtered condition. Although accommodation was statistically significant, the effect was small, so we followed with a perception study to examine listeners' abilities to detect differences in accommodation across conditions. Shadowed tokens from participants in the unfiltered condition were indeed judged by listeners to be more similar to the model talker's productions that those from participants in the filtered condition. However, acoustic measurements and listener judgments of accommodation were not significantly correlated, enforcing the intuitive concept that accommodation and listeners' judgments of similarity are holistic and do not hone in on singular features in the acoustic signal.
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.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 it