ArticlePsychonomic bulletin & review2025
Is rate-dependent perception affected by linguistic information about the intended syllable rate?
Article in Psychonomic bulletin & review, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Speech is highly variable in rate, challenging the perception of sound contrasts that are dependent on duration. Listeners deal with such variability by perceiving incoming speech relative to the rate in the surrounding context. For instance, the same ambiguous vowel is more likely to be perceived as being long when embedded in a fast sentence, but as short when embedded in a slow sentence. However, it is still debated to what extent domain-general and domain-specific mechanisms (i.e., language- or speech-specific mechanisms) contribute to rate-dependent perception. Here we examined the role of domain-specific mechanisms in an implicit rate-normalization task in which we manipulated linguistic knowledge about how many syllables words have. Dutch participants were presented with lists of Dutch words that were acoustically ambiguous with regard to having one or two syllables (e.g., /k?'lɔm/ can be monosyllabic klom, /klɔm/, or bisyllabic kolom, /ko.'lɔm/). While being presented with these ambiguous word lists, they saw monosyllabic or bisyllabic transcriptions of the lists on the screen. We predicted that the same acoustic stimulus would be perceived as faster (more syllables per second) when combined with bisyllabic orthography compared to monosyllabic orthography. In turn, this would lead to downstream influences on vowel length perception in target words embedded within the word lists (rate-dependent perception of Dutch /ɑ/ vs./ /aː/). Despite evidence of successful orthographic disambiguation of the ambiguous word lists, we did not find evidence that linguistic knowledge influenced participants' rate-dependent perception. Our results are best accounted for by a domain-general account of rate-dependent perception.
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.