ArticlePhonetica2017
Nonnative Accent Discrimination with Words and Sentences.
Article in Phonetica, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Exposure to nonnative-accented speech reduces listening effort and improves social judgments of the speaker.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Emblem Gestures Improve Perception and Evaluation of Non-native Speech.Frontiers in psychology · 2020Article
- Vocal alignment to native and non-native speakers of English.The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAccent detection studies have shown native listeners to be highly sensitive to the presence of nonnative accents. This study examined the robustness of this sensitivity.
methodsWe evaluated listeners' accent discrimination performance when presented with a stimulus set consisting of multiple nonnative accents, as well as words and sentences that were unique in each trial. Listeners heard pairs of talkers reading the same word or sentence and indicated whether the talkers' native languages were the same or different. Talkers included two native talkers and six nonnative talkers from three native language backgrounds.
resultsListeners were highly sensitive to the difference between native and nonnative accents, confirming earlier findings, but were much less sensitive to the difference between two nonnative accents. Furthermore, while stimulus length affected listeners' sensitivity to the difference between native and nonnative accents, this factor had a minimal effect on their sensitivity to the difference between two nonnative accents.
conclusionThe findings suggest that task and stimulus characteristics have a significant effect on the degree of sensitivity to nonnative accents.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.