ArticleBrain and language2019
Effects of formant proximity and stimulus prototypicality on the neural discrimination of vowels: Evidence from the auditory frequency-following response.
Article in Brain and language, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Time-efficient Methodology for Robustly Assessing Speech-related Mismatch Responses in Adults and Infants.Journal of cognitive neuroscience · 2026Article
- Encoding of speech in convolutional layers and the brain stem based on language experience.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Perceptual warping exposes categorical representations for speech in human brainstem responses.NeuroImage · 2023Article
- Neuronal and behavioral affective perceptions of human and naturalness-reduced emotional prosodies.Frontiers in computational neuroscience · 2022Article
- Asymmetries in Accessing Vowel Representations Are Driven by Phonological and Acoustic Properties: Neural and Behavioral Evidence From Natural German Minimal Pairs.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2021Article
- Neurophysiological Correlates of Asymmetries in Vowel Perception: An English-French Cross-Linguistic Event-Related Potential Study.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Cross-language speech perception experiments indicate that for many vowel contrasts, discrimination is easier when the same pair of vowels is presented in one direction compared to the reverse direction. According to one account, these directional asymmetries reflect a universal bias favoring "focal" vowels (i.e., vowels with prominent spectral peaks formed by the convergence of adjacent formants). An alternative account is that such effects reflect an experience-dependent bias favoring prototypical exemplars of native-language vowel categories. Here, we tested the predictions of these accounts by recording the auditory frequency-following response in English-speaking listeners to two synthetic variants of the vowel /u/ that differed in the proximity of their first and second formants and prototypicality, with stimuli arranged in oddball and reversed-oddball blocks. Participants showed evidence of neural discrimination when the more-focal/less-prototypic /u/ served as the deviant stimulus, but not when the less-focal/more-prototypic /u/ served as the deviant, consistent with the focalization account.
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.