ArticleAttention, perception & psychophysics2023
Influence of face masks on recalibration of phonetic categories.
Article in Attention, perception & psychophysics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Previous research demonstrates listeners dynamically adjust phonetic categories in line with lexical context. While listeners show flexibility in adapting speech categories, recalibration may be constrained when variability can be attributed externally. It has been hypothesized that when listeners attribute atypical speech input to a causal factor, phonetic recalibration is attenuated. The current study investigated this theory directly by examining the influence of face masks, an external factor that affects both visual and articulatory cues, on the magnitude of phonetic recalibration. Across four experiments, listeners completed a lexical decision exposure phase in which they heard an ambiguous sound in either /s/-biasing or /ʃ/-biasing lexical contexts, while simultaneously viewing a speaker with a mask off, mask on the chin, or mask over the mouth. Following exposure, all listeners completed an auditory phonetic categorization test along an /ʃ/-/s/ continuum. In Experiment 1 (when no face mask was present during exposure trials), Experiment 2 (when the face mask was on the chin), Experiment 3 (when the face mask was on the mouth during ambiguous items), and Experiment 4 (when the face mask was on the mouth during the entire exposure phase), listeners showed a robust and equivalent phonetic recalibration effect. Recalibration manifested as greater proportion /s/ responses for listeners in the /s/-biased exposure group, relative to listeners in the /ʃ/-biased exposure group. Results support the notion that listeners do not causally attribute face masks with speech idiosyncrasies, which may reflect a general speech learning adjustment during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.