ArticleAttention, perception & psychophysics2022
Implicit and explicit learning in talker identification.
Article in Attention, perception & psychophysics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Family identity is represented within vocal categories by the gerbil auditory cortex.Current biology : CB · 2026Article
- Listeners do not tune in to more rewarding voices.Attention, perception & psychophysics · 2026Article
- Implicit voice learning through discrimination outperforms explicit listen-and-memorize tasks.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- A model for person perception from familiar and unfamiliar voices.Communications psychology · 2023Review
- Implicit and Explicit Voice Training Effects on Speech-on-Speech Perception and Listening Effort.Ear and hearingArticle
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
In the real world, listeners seem to implicitly learn talkers' vocal identities during interactions that prioritize attending to the content of talkers' speech. In contrast, most laboratory experiments of talker identification employ training paradigms that require listeners to explicitly practice identifying voices. Here, we investigated whether listeners become familiar with talkers' vocal identities during initial exposures that do not involve explicit talker identification. Participants were assigned to one of three exposure tasks, in which they heard identical stimuli but were differentially required to attend to the talkers' vocal identity or to the verbal content of their speech: (1) matching the talker to a concurrent visual cue (talker-matching); (2) discriminating whether the talker was the same as the prior trial (talker 1-back); or (3) discriminating whether speech content matched the previous trial (verbal 1-back). All participants were then tested on their ability to learn to identify talkers from novel speech content. Critically, we manipulated whether the talkers during this post-test differed from those heard during training. Compared to learning to identify novel talkers, listeners were significantly more accurate learning to identify the talkers they had previously been exposed to in the talker-matching and verbal 1-back tasks, but not the talker 1-back task. The correlation between talker identification test performance and exposure task performance was also greater when the talkers were the same in both tasks. These results suggest that listeners learn talkers' vocal identity implicitly during speech perception, even if they are not explicitly attending to the talkers' identity.
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.