MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2918866316 · doi:10.1037/xlm0000674

Influencing the time and space of lexical competition: The effect of gradient foreign accentedness.

2019· article· en· W2918866316 on OpenAlexaff
Vincent Porretta, Aki-Juhani Kyröläinen

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Experimental Psychology Learning Memory and Cognition · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPhonetics and Phonology Research
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLexiconCompetitor analysisCompetition (biology)PsychologyDuration (music)PronunciationLinguisticsCognitive psychologyComputer scienceMarketingArtificial intelligenceBusinessLiteratureArtBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article examines the influence of gradient foreign accentedness on lexical competition during spoken word recognition. Using native and Mandarin-accented English words ranging in degree of foreign accentedness, we investigate the effect of increased accentedness on (a) the size of the competitor space and (b) the strength and duration of competitor activation. Here, we analyze the number of misperceptions in a transcription task, as well as the time course of competitor activation in a Visual World Paradigm eye-tracking task. The transcription data show that as accentedness increases, the number of unique misperceptions increases. This indicates that greater accent strength induces the activation of many additional competitors within the competition space relative to native speech. The eye-tracking data further show that, as accentedness increases, looks to competitors (not produced in the transcription task) increase both in likelihood and duration. This indicates that greater accentedness boosts the strength of competitor activation as well as the duration of the competition process, even when comprehension is ultimately successful, suggesting strong and diffuse competition within the lexicon. The results provide evidence of changes in the underlying dynamics, which lead to the pervasive processing costs associated with foreign-accented speech that are commonly observed in behavioral data. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.404
Threshold uncertainty score0.512

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.321 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations11
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Experimental Psychology Learning Memory and CognitionSame topicPhonetics and Phonology ResearchFrench-language works237,207