Abstract
Differences between intelligibility of interrupted and compressed speech were examined by holding speech information constant and varying duration of silent intervals between speech segments. We hypothesized that interrupted speech would be more intelligible than compressed speech because silent intervals could be used to “process” the fragmented speech segments. Sentences and words were sampled by computer with a 50% duty cycle. Two discard intervals, 125 and 50 msec, were used. Sample segments were retrieved and arranged with varying silent intervals between segments (3 less than, 1 equal to, and 2 greater than the duration of original discard intervals), producing six experimental conditions. When sample segments for the sentences were abutted with no silent interval (compression), intelligibility deteriorated. When silent intervals were inserted, intelligibility improved regardless of whether the silent interval was less than, equal to (interruption), or greater than the original discard interval. Since intelligibility did not vary significantly with the amount of “processing” time inserted, perhaps the silent interval simply “marked” the place where speech had been removed. Neither the “processing time” or “marking” hypotheses explain the results for word intelligibility.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
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.
