Читать книгу The Handbook of Speech Perception - Группа авторов - Страница 66

The data linking perception and production within individuals are also surprisingly sparse. Most of the data show that talkers’ perception and production categories are somewhat similar. For example, Newman (2003) found small correlations between the VOT prototypes of listeners and their production VOT values (accounting for approximately 27 percent of the variance). However, Frieda et al. (2000) did not find such a correlation for the perceptual prototype for the vowel /i/ and production values. Fox (1982) showed that the factor analysis dimensions derived from listeners’ judgments of similarity between vowels could be predicted by the acoustics of vowels produced by the participants, but only by the corner vowels /i, u, A/. Bell‐Berti et al. (1979) categorized the manner in which participants produced the tense/lax distinction in front vowels based on their examination of electromyographic recordings. They later found that those participants who used a tongue‐height production strategy showed larger boundary shifts in an anchoring condition in a vowel‐perception test than those who used a muscle tension implementation of tense/lax. Perkell et al. (2004) also grouped participants on the basis of measurements of production data, and found that these groups performed differently in perception tests. The more distinct the production contrasts between two vowels that talkers produced the more likely those subjects were able to distinguish tokens in a continuum of those vowels.

The most recent evidence in support of this correlational relation between perception and production abilities comes from Franken et al. (2017). In this study, production variability for vowel formant values was measured and the ability to discriminate between vowel tokens assessed. These two variables were found to correlate in their data. However, the correlations are modest and smaller than those reported by Perkell et al. (2004). The argument put forward in Franken et al. (2017) is that talkers with better perceptual acuity are less variable in production and that these talkers are more sensitive to feedback discrepancies. Indeed, Villacorta, Perkell, and Guenther (2007) showed a greater response to formant perturbation in subjects who had greater acoustic acuity. However, this finding is inconsistent with MacDonald, Purcell, and Munhall’s (2011) meta‐analysis of the variability of production and compensation magnitude in F1 and F2 for 116 subjects. The lack of relationship between variability and compensation observed by MacDonald et al. is important given the large sample size considered in their analysis.