Abstract
This study aimed to characterize the linguistic interference that occurs during speech-in-speech comprehension by combining offline and online measures, which included an intelligibility task (at a −5 dB Signal-to-Noise Ratio) and 2 lexical decision tasks (at a −5 dB and 0 dB SNR) that were performed with French spoken target words. In these 3 experiments we always compared the masking effects of speech backgrounds (i.e., 4-talker babble) that were produced in the same language as the target language (i.e., French) or in unknown foreign languages (i.e., Irish and Italian) to the masking effects of corresponding non-speech backgrounds (i.e., speech-derived fluctuating noise). The fluctuating noise contained similar spectro-temporal information as babble but lacked linguistic information. At −5 dB SNR, both tasks revealed significantly divergent results between the unknown languages (i.e., Irish and Italian) with Italian and French hindering French target word identification to a similar extent, whereas Irish led to significantly better performances on these tasks. By comparing the performances obtained with speech and fluctuating noise backgrounds, we were able to evaluate the effect of each language. The intelligibility task showed a significant difference between babble and fluctuating noise for French, Irish and Italian, suggesting acoustic and linguistic effects for each language. However, the lexical decision task, which reduces the effect of post-lexical interference, appeared to be more accurate, as it only revealed a linguistic effect for French. Thus, although French and Italian had equivalent masking effects on French word identification, the nature of their interference was different. This finding suggests that the differences observed between the masking effects of Italian and Irish can be explained at an acoustic level but not at a linguistic level.
Highlights
In daily life, speech is often produced and perceived with background noise, which interferes with the comprehension of target signals
This is of particular interest from a psycholinguistic perspective given that most models of lexical access postulate that word identification is the result of strong competitive mechanisms between simultaneously activated units, these models have different proposals regarding the exact nature of the competitors
Post-hoc comparisons with the HSD Tukey test showed that there were no significant differences between the languages when the background was fluctuating noise
Summary
Speech is often produced and perceived with background noise, which interferes with the comprehension of target signals. With regard to speech-in-speech comprehension, informational masking involves a competition between different linguistic information levels (i.e., prosodic, phonetic and lexical information) that are extracted from both signals (i.e., target speech vs concurrent speech). This is of particular interest from a psycholinguistic perspective given that most models of lexical access postulate that word identification is the result of strong competitive mechanisms between simultaneously activated units (see, for example, NAM [5], the revised Cohort model [6], TRACE [7] or Shortlist [8]), these models have different proposals regarding the exact nature of the competitors. The goals of our research are to investigate whether informational masking can be decomposed and, if so, whether it varies depending on the type of linguistic information that is carried by the background speech
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
