4.2 Article

Effects of contextual support on preschoolers' accented speech comprehension

期刊

JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL CHILD PSYCHOLOGY
卷 146, 期 -, 页码 156-180

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.jecp.2016.01.018

关键词

Accent; Accented speech; Speech comprehension; Word recognition; Adverse listening conditions; Eye tracking

资金

  1. National Science Foundation [BCS-1230003]
  2. Division Of Behavioral and Cognitive Sci
  3. Direct For Social, Behav & Economic Scie [1230003] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Young children often hear speech in unfamiliar accents, but relatively little research characterizes their comprehension capacity. The current study tested preschoolers' comprehension of familiar-accented versus unfamiliar-accented speech with varying levels of contextual support from sentence frames (full sentences vs. isolated words) and from visual context (four salient pictured alternatives vs. the absence of salient visual referents). The familiar accent advantage was more robust when visual context was absent, suggesting that previous findings of good accent comprehension in infants and young children may result from ceiling effects in easier tasks (e.g., picture fixation, picture selection) relative to the more difficult tasks often used with older children and adults. In contrast to prior work on mispronunciations, where most errors were novel object responses, children in the current study did not select novel object referents above chance levels. This suggests that some property of accented speech may dissuade children from inferring that an unrecognized familiar-but-accented word has a novel referent. Finally, children showed detectable accent processing difficulty despite presumed incidental community exposure. Results suggest that preschoolers' accented speech comprehension is still developing, consistent with theories of protracted development of speech processing. (C) 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据