Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Children’s perception of their phonologically modified speech Sofia Strömbergsson KTH Speech, Music and Hearing.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Children’s perception of their phonologically modified speech Sofia Strömbergsson KTH Speech, Music and Hearing."— Presentation transcript:

1

2 Children’s perception of their phonologically modified speech Sofia Strömbergsson KTH Speech, Music and Hearing

3 2012-09-11Interspeech 2012, Portland2 Dive me the tube. No, not the tube! The tube! [tu:b] ≠ The tube? Phonological impairment (PI)

4 2012-09-11Interspeech 2012, Portland3 Phonological impairment (PI)

5 2012-09-11Interspeech 2012, Portland4 How do children – with and without PI – perceive their own recorded (original and modified) speech? For the children with PI, how does this compare to their online judgment of their deviant speech?

6 2012-09-11Interspeech 2012, Portland5 Participants 12 children with PI 4-7 ys Language comprehension OK /k, g, ŋ / -> [t, d, n] 20 children w/ typical speech 4-7 ys Language comprehension OK

7 2012-09-11Interspeech 2012, Portland6 ([k] replaced by [k], still correct) ([t] replaced by [k], to deviant) (deviant /k/ replaced by [k], ”corrected”) (deviant /t/ replaced by [t], ”corrected”)

8 2012-09-11Interspeech 2012, Portland7 1.External identification 2.Modified speech I (Parrot): correct/incorrect? 3.Modified speech II (Parrot): correct/incorrect? 4.Modified speech III (Monkey): me/modified? 5.PI: Own speech (online): correct/incorrect? 6.PI: Own speech (rec’d): correct/incorrect?

9 2012-09-11Interspeech 2012, Portland8 1.External identification 2.Modified speech I (Parrot): correct/incorrect? 3.Modified speech II (Parrot): correct/incorrect? 4.Modified speech III (Monkey): me/modified? 5.PI: Own speech (online): correct/incorrect? 6.PI: Own speech (rec’d): correct/incorrect?

10 2012-09-11Interspeech 2012, Portland9 1.External identification 2.Modified speech I (Parrot): correct/incorrect? 3.Modified speech II (Parrot): correct/incorrect? 4.Modified speech III (Monkey): me/modified? 5.PI: Own speech (online): correct/incorrect? 6.PI: Own speech (rec’d): correct/incorrect?

11 2012-09-11Interspeech 2012, Portland10 1.External identification 2.Modified speech I (Parrot): correct/incorrect? 3.Modified speech II (Parrot): correct/incorrect? 4.Modified speech III (Monkey): me/modified? 5.PI: Own speech (online): correct/incorrect? 6.PI: Own speech (rec’d): correct/incorrect?

12 2012-09-11Interspeech 2012, Portland11 PI < nPI F(1,30) = 9.65, p =.004 Online < Rec’d t(143) = -3.64, p <.001

13 2012-09-11Interspeech 2012, Portland12 Worse performance on modified stimuli? YES Performance dependent on accuracy? YES Hard to detect modification when phonological form is unchanged.

14 2012-09-11Interspeech 2012, Portland13 Conclusions External perception is not the problem Use recordings – original and/or modified – to approach the real challenge: self-monitoring

15 2012-09-11Interspeech 2012, Portland14 Thank you for your attention!


Download ppt "Children’s perception of their phonologically modified speech Sofia Strömbergsson KTH Speech, Music and Hearing."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google