Concurrent aero-tactile stimulation does not bias perception of VOT for non-initial stops

Abstract

Listen

Translate article

Previous work has established that puffs of air applied to the skin and timed with listening tasks bias the perception of voicing in onset stops by naive listeners (Gick and Derrick, 2009; Goldenberg et al., 2015). While the primary cue for the voicing contrast in stops is VOT (Lisker and Abramson, 1964), in English aspiration typically functions as a cue foot initially. This study tests the effect of air puffs on perception of voicing for English stops in a non-foot-initial context (“apa/aba”) using VOT continua. Goldenberg et al. (2015) have shown that listeners are sensitive to aero-tactile effects only when these are congruent with the expected contrast (i.e., in VOT but not vowel quality distinctions). Since VOT is generally non-contrastive for English stops that are not foot-initial, air puffs were not expected to affect perception in the current case, and indeed, of 22 participants (11 females; mean age 34.2) tested, 20 showed no effect. Comparison of this null result to the significant bias observed in the earlier (foot-initial context) study extends the finding that, for aero-tactile stimulation to bias perception, the cues must be consistent with those expected in production of the perceived sounds.