Listeners hearing an ambiguous speech sound flexibly adjust their phonetic categories in accordance with lipread information telling what the phoneme should be (recalibration). Here, we tested the stability of lipread-induced recalibration over time. Listeners were exposed to an ambiguous sound halfway between /t/ and /p/ that was dubbed onto a face articulating either /t/ or /p/. When tested immediately, listeners exposed to lipread /t/ were more likely to categorize the ambiguous sound as /t/ than listeners exposed to /p/. This aftereffect dissipated quickly with prolonged testing and did not reappear after a 24-hour delay. Recalibration of phonetic categories is thus a fragile phenomenon.
Bertelson, P., Vroomen, J., & de Gelder, B. (2003). Visual recalibration of auditory speech identification: A McGurk aftereffect. Psychological Science, 14, 592-597.
2.
Brancazio, L. (2004). Lexical influences in audiovisual speech perception . Journal of Experimental Psychology-human Perception and Performance, 30, 445-463.
3.
Eimas, P.D., & Corbit, J.D. (1973). Selective adaptation of linguistic feature detectors . Cognitive Psychology, 4, 99-109.
4.
Eisner, F., & McQueen, J.M. (2005). The specificity of perceptual learning in speech processing. Perception & Psychophysics, 67, 224-238.
5.
Eisner, F., & McQueen, J.M. (2006). Perceptual learning in speech: Stability over time. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 119, 1950-1953.
6.
Ganong, W.F. (1980). Phonetic categorization in auditory word perception . Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 6, 110-125.
7.
Kraljic, T., & Samuel, A.G. (2005). Perceptual learning for speech: Is there a return to normal? Cognitive Psychology, 51, 141-178.
8.
Kraljic, T., & Samuel, A.G. (2006). Generalization in perceptual learning for speech . Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 13, 262-268.
9.
Kraljic, T., & Samuel, A.G. (2007). Perceptual adjustments to multiple speakers. Journal of Memory and Language, 56, 1-15.
10.
Norris, D., McQueen, J.M., & Cutler, A. (2003). Perceptual learning in speech. Cognitive Psychology, 47, 204-238.
11.
Samuel, A.G. (1986). Red herring detectors and speech perception In defence of selective adaptation. Cognitive Psychology , 18, 452-499.
12.
Stevens, M. (2007). Perceptual adaptation to phonological differences between language varieties. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, University of Gent, Gent.
13.
Sumby, W.H., & Pollack, I. (1954). Visual contribution to speech intelligibility in noise. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 26, 212-215.
14.
Van Linden, S., Stekelenburg, J.J., Tuomainen, J., & Vroomen, J. (2007). Lexical effects on auditory speech perception: An electrophysiological study. Neuroscience Letters, 420, 49-52.
15.
Van Linden, S., & Vroomen, J. (2007). Recalibration of phonetic categories by lipread speech versus lexical information. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 33, 1483-1494.
16.
Van Linden, S., & Vroomen, J. (2008). Audiovisual speech recalibration in children. Journal of Child Language, 35, 809-822
17.
Vroomen, J., van Linden, S., de Gelder, B., & Bertelson, P. (2007). Visual recalibration and selective adaptation in auditory-visual speech perception: Contrasting build-up courses. Neuropsychologia, 45, 572-577.
18.
Vroomen, J., van Linden, S., Keetels, M., de Gelder, W., & Bertelson, P. (2004). Selective adaptation and recalibration of auditory speech by lipread information: dissipation. Speech Communication , 44, 55-61.
