Evaluating the relationship between sublexical and lexical processing in speech perception: Evidence from aphasia

Simple item page
dc.citation.firstpage192en_US
dc.citation.journalTitleNeuropsychologiaen_US
dc.citation.lastpage212en_US
dc.citation.volumeNumber96en_US
dc.contributor.authorDial, Heatheren_US
dc.contributor.authorMartin, Randien_US
dc.date.accessioned2017-08-11T20:05:52Z
dc.date.available2017-08-11T20:05:52Z
dc.date.issued2017en_US
dc.description.abstractSeveral studies have reported that aphasic patients may perform substantially better on lexical than sublexical perception tasks (e.g., Miceli et al., 1980). These findings challenge claims made by models of speech perception which assume obligatory sublexical processing (e.g., McClelland and Elman, 1986; Norris, 1994). However, prior studies have not closely matched the phonological similarity of targets and distractors or task demands of the sublexical and lexical perception tasks. The current study addressed shortcomings of these prior studies, testing 13 aphasic patients on sublexical and lexical tasks matched in phonological similarity of stimuli and task demands. When the lexical and sublexical tasks were not matched (Experiment 1a), as in prior studies (e.g., Miceli et al., 1980), several patients with impaired sublexical perception were within the control range on tasks tapping lexical perception. In contrast, when the lexical and sublexical tasks (sublexical: syllable discrimination, auditory-written syllable matching (AWSM); lexical: word discrimination, lexical decision, and picture-word matching (PWM)) were matched on these factors (Experiments 1b and 2), in most instances, patients were impaired on both sublexical and lexical tasks relative to controls and performance on the lexical tasks was not significantly greater than that on the sublexical tasks. For two patients, performance on one lexical task was statistically better than that on one sublexical task, but the advantage was not replicated across other task comparisons. The current study is consistent with models of speech perception which assume obligatory sublexical processing and fails to support models that do not require successful sublexical perception in order to access lexical levels (e.g., Goldinger, 1998; Hickok and Poeppel, 2000).en_US
dc.identifier.citationDial, Heather and Martin, Randi. "Evaluating the relationship between sublexical and lexical processing in speech perception: Evidence from aphasia." <i>Neuropsychologia,</i> 96, (2017) Elsevier: 192-212. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2017.01.009.
dc.identifier.doihttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2017.01.009en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/1911/96646
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.publisherElsevier
dc.rightsThis is an author's peer-reviewed final manuscript, as accepted by the publisher. The published article is copyrighted by Elsevier.en_US
dc.subject.keywordAphasiaen_US
dc.subject.keywordDiscriminationen_US
dc.subject.keywordDual routeen_US
dc.subject.keywordLexicalen_US
dc.subject.keywordSpeech perceptionen_US
dc.subject.keywordSublexicalen_US
dc.titleEvaluating the relationship between sublexical and lexical processing in speech perception: Evidence from aphasiaen_US
dc.typeJournal articleen_US
dc.type.dcmiTexten_US
dc.type.publicationpost-printen_US
Files
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
dial-martin-neuropsychologia.pdf
Size:
1.33 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
Download
Collections
Faculty Publications
Department of Psychological Sciences Papers and Publications