Abstract
The telling fact about duplex perception is that listeners integrate into a unitary phonetic percept signals that are coherent from a phonetic point of view, even though the signals are, on purely auditory grounds, separate sources. Here we explore the limits on the integration of a sinusoidal consonant cue (theF3 transition for [da] vs. [ga]) with the resonances of the remainder of the syllable. Perceiving duplexly, listeners hear the whistle of the sinusoid, but also the [da] and [ga] for which the sinusoid provides the critical information. In the first experiment, phonetic integration was significantly reduced, but not to zero, by a precursor that extended the transition cue forward in time so that it started 50 msec before the cue. The effect was the same above and below the duplexity threshold (the intensity of sinusoid in the combined pattern at which the whistle was just barely audible). In the second experiment, integration was reduced once again by the precursor, and also, but only below the duplexity threshold, by harmonics of the cues that were simultaneous with it. The third experiment showed that the simultaneous harmonics reduced phonetic integration only by serving as distractors while also permitting the conclusion that the precursor produced its effects by making the cue part of a coherent and competing auditory pattern, and so “capturing” it. The fourth experiment supported this interpretation by showing that for some subjects the amount of capture was reduced when the capturing tone was itself captured by being made part of a tonal complex. The results support the assumption that the independent phonetic system will integrate across disparate sources according to the cohesive power of that system as measured against the evidence for separate sources.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bailey, P. J., &Herrmann, P. (1993). A reexamination of duplex perception evoked by intensity differences.Perception & Psychophysics,54, 20–32.
Bentin, S., &Mann, V. (1990). Masking and stimulus intensity effects on duplex perception: A confirmation of the dissociation between speech and nonspeech modes.Journal of the Acoustical Society of America,88, 64–74.
Bentin, S., & Repp, B. H. (1986).Central masking effects in duplex speech perception. Unpublished manuscript.
Bregman, A. S. (1987). The meaning of duplex perception: Sounds as transparent objects. In M. E. H. Schouten (Ed.),The psychophysics of speech perception (pp. 95–111). Dordrecht: Martinus Nijhoff.
Bregman, A. S. (1990).Auditory scene analysis. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Bregman, A. S., &Pinker, S. (1978). Auditory streaming and the building of timbre.Canadian Journal of Psychology,32, 19–31.
Ciocca, V., &Bregman, A. S. (1989). The effects of auditory streaming on duplex perception.Perception & Psychophysics,46, 39–48.
Ciocca, V., &Darwin, C. J. (1993). Effects of onset asynchrony on pitch perception: Adaptation or grouping?Journal of the Acoustical Society of America,93, 2870–2878.
Crowder, R. G., &Morton, J. (1969). Pre-categorical acoustic storage (PAS).Perception & Psychophysics,5, 365–373.
Darwin, C. J. (1995). Perceiving vowels in the presence of another sound: A quantitative test of the “Old-plus-New” heuristic. In C. Sorin, J. Mariani, H. Méloni, & J. Schoentgen (Eds.),Levels in speech communication: Relations and interactions: A tribute to Max Wajskop (pp. 1–12). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Darwin, C. J., &Culling, J. F. (1990). Speech perception seen through the ear.Speech Communication,9, 469–475.
Darwin, C. J., &Sutherland, N. S. (1984). Grouping frequency components of vowels: When is a harmonic not a harmonic?Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,36A, 193–208.
Diehl, R. L., &Kluender, K. R. (1989). On the objects of speech perception.Ecological Psychology,1, 121–144.
Eimas, P. D., &Miller, J. D. (1992). Organization in the perception of speech by young infants.Psychological Science,3, 340–345.
Fowler, C. A., &Rosenblum, L. D. (1990). Duplex perception: A comparison of monosyllables and slamming doors.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,16, 742–754.
Fowler, C. A., &Rosenblum, L. D. (1991). The perception of phonetic gestures. In I. G. Mattingly & M. Studdert-Kennedy (Eds.),Modularity and the motor theory of speech perception (pp. 33–59). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Hall, M. D., &Pastore, R. E. (1992). Musical duplex perception: Perception of figurally good chords with subliminal distinguishing tones.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,18, 752–762.
Hukin, R. W., &Darwin, C. J. (1995). Comparison of the effect of onset asynchrony on auditory grouping in pitch matching and vowel identification.Perception & Psychophysics,57, 191–196.
Kuhl, P. K. (1981). Discrimination of speech by nonhuman animals: Basic auditory sensitivities conducive to the perception of speechsound categories.Journal of the Acoustical Society of America,70, 340–349.
Liberman, A. M., Cooper, F. S., Shankweiler, D. P., &Studdert-Kennedy, M. (1967). Perception of the speech code.Psychological Review,74, 431–461.
Liberman, A. M., &Mattingly, I. G. (1985). The motor theory of speech perception revised.Cognition,21, 1–36.
Liberman, A. M., &Mattingly, I. G. (1989). A specialization for speech perception.Science,243, 489–494.
Mann, V. A., &Liberman, A. M. (1983). Some differences between phonetic and auditory modes of perception.Cognition,14, 211–235.
Miller, J. D. (1977). Perception of speech sounds in animals: Evidence for speech processing by mammalian auditory mechanisms. In T. H. Bullock (Ed.), Recognition of complex acoustic signals (Life Sciences Research Report 5, pp. 49–58). Berlin: Dahlem Konferenzen.
Nygaard, L. C., &Eimas, P. D. (1990). A new version of duplex perception: Evidence for phonetic and nonphonetic fusion.Journal of the Acoustical Society of America,88, 75–86.
Rand, T. C. (1974). Dichotic release from masking for speech.Journal of the Acoustical Society of America,55, 678–680.
Remez, R. E., &Rubin, P. E. (1984). On the perception of intonation from sinusoidal sentences.Perception & Psychophysics,35, 429–440.
Remez, R. E., &Rubin, P. E. (1990). On the perception of speech from time-varying acoustic information: Contributions of amplitude variation.Perception & Psychophysics,48, 313–325.
Remez, R. E., Rubin, P. E., Berns, S. M., Pardo, J. S., &Lang, J. M. (1994). On the perceptual organization of speech.Psychological Review,101, 129–156.
Remez, R. E., Rubin, P. E., Pisoni, D. B., &Carrell, T. D. (1981). Speech perception without traditional speech cues.Science,212, 947–950.
Repp, B. H. (1984). Categorical perception: Issues, methods, findings. In N. J. Lass (Ed.),Speech and language: Advances in basic research and practice (Vol. 10, pp. 243–335). New York: Academic Press.
Repp, B. H., Milburn, C., &Ashkenas, J. (1983). Duplex perception: Confirmation of fusion.Perception & Psychophysics,33, 333–337.
Richards, W. (1971). Anomalous stereoscopic depth perception.Journal of the Optical Society of America,61, 410–414.
Schouten, M. E. H., &Hessen, A. J. van (1993). Modeling phoneme perception. I: Categorical perception.Journal of the Acoustical Society of America,92, 1841–1855.
Shankweiler, D., &Studdert-Kennedy, M. (1967). Identification of consonants and vowels presented to the left and right ears.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,19, 59–63.
Stevens, K. N., &House, A. S. (1972). Speech perception. In J. V. Tobias (Ed.),Foundations of modern auditory theory (pp. 1–62). New York: Academic Press.
Vorperian, H. K., Ochs, M. T., &Grantham, D. W. (1995). Stimulus intensity and fundamental frequency effects on duplex perception.Journal of the Acoustical Society of America,98, 735–744.
Whalen, D. H., &Liberman, A. M. (1987). Speech perception takes precedence over nonspeech perception.Science,237, 169–171.
Whalen, D. H., Wiley, E. R., Rubin, P. E., &Cooper, F. S. (1990). The Haskins Laboratories’ pulse code modulation (PCM) system.Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers,22, 550–559.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
This research was supported by NICHD Grant HD-01994 to Haskins Laboratories.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Whalen, D.H., Liberman, A.M. Limits on phonetic integration in duplex perception. Perception & Psychophysics 58, 857–870 (1996). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03205488
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03205488