Interlocutor accommodation of gradually altered nasal signal levels in a model speaker
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
BACKGROUND: Phonetic accommodation is observed when interacting speakers gradually converge (or diverge) on phonetic features over the course of a conversation. The present experiment investigated whether gradual changes in the nasal signal levels of a pre-recorded model speaker would lead to accommodation in the nasalance scores of the interlocutor in a speech-shadowing experiment. METHODS: Twenty female speakers in two groups repeated sentences after a pre-recorded model speaker whose nasal signal level was gradually increased or decreased over the course of the experiment. Outcome measures were the mean nasalance scores at the initial baseline, maximum nasal signal level, minimum nasal signal level and final baseline conditions. The order of presentation of the maximum and minimum nasal signal levels was varied between the two groups. RESULTS: = 0.045. Both groups of participants demonstrated lower nasalance scores in response to increased nasal signal levels in the model (phonetic divergence). The group that was first presented with the maximum nasal signal levels demonstrated lower nasalance scores for the minimum nasal signal level condition (phonetic convergence). CONCLUSION: Speakers showed a consistent divergent reaction to a more nasal-sounding model speaker, but their response to a less nasal-sounding model may depend on the order of presentation of the manipulations. More research is needed to investigate the effects of increased versus decreased nasality in the speech of an interlocutor.
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) | 0.003 | 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