ArticleBehavior research methods2026
Toolkit for acoustic-phonetic analysis of naturalistic speech data.
Article in Behavior research methods, 2026. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A major limitation in the speech sciences is access to naturalistic data in experimental settings and the difficulty of translating laboratory designs to real-world contexts. Researchers studying speech production or perception often rely on in-lab recordings, which constrain the sociolinguistic contexts examined and limit ecological validity. The Toolkit for Acoustic-Phonetic Analysis (TAPA) is an open-source pipeline that automates the acquisition, transcription, speaker diarization, forced alignment, and per-segment acoustic analysis of naturalistic, single/multi-speaker audio. The current release supports vowel formant extraction, stop voice onset time, and fricative spectral moments. We demonstrate TAPA on the 2016 U.S. presidential debate, extracting nearly 33,000 segments from a 90-min recording, and validate each measurement type against hand-coded annotation. Vowel formant agreement with expert measurements was high (F1 r = 0.89, F2 r = 0.87). Stop VOT showed reliable aggregate means but poor per-token agreement (r = - 0.04) because of a training-deployment mismatch in the neural VOT classifier. Fricative spectral standard deviation agreed strongly with hand-coded values overall (r = 0.80), and center of gravity agreed strongly for sibilants (/s/ r = 0.87, /ʃ/ r = 0.94), while non-sibilant moments diverged systematically. These findings suggest that TAPA can be used to increase access to naturalistic speech data and speed up the processing timeline with experts' supervision.
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.