A comparison of the lexical characteristics of 88 auditory misperceptions (i.e., slips of the ear) showed no di fference in word-frequency, neighborhood density, and neighborhood frequency between the actual and the perceived utterances. Another comparison of slip of the ear tokens (i.e., actual and perceived utterances) and words in general (i.e., randomly selected from the lexicon) showed that slip of the ear tokens had denser neighborhoods and higher neighborhood frequency than words in general, as predicted from laboratory studies. Contrary to prediction, slip of the ear tokens were higher in frequency of occurrence than words in general. Additional laboratory-based investigations examined the possible source of the contradictory word frequency finding, high lighting the importance of using naturalistic and experimental data to develop models of spoken language processing.
Baars, B.J., Motley, M.T., & Mackay, D. (1975). Output editing for lexical status from artificially elicited slips of the tongue. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 14, 382-391.
2.
Bard, E.G., & Anderson, A.H. (1994). The unintelligibility of speech to children: Effects of referent availability. Journal of Child Language, 21, 623-648.
3.
Bock, K. (1996). Language production: Methods and methodologies . Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 3, 395-421.
4.
Bond, Z.S. (1999). Slips of the ear: Errors in the perception of casual conversation. New York: Academic Press.
5.
Bond, Z.S., & Garnes, S. (1980). Misperceptions of fluent speech. In R. A. Cole (Ed.), Perception and production of fluent speech. (pp.115-132.) Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
6.
Bond, Z.S., & Moore, T. (1994). A note on acoustic-phonetics of inadvertently clear speech. Speech Communication, 14, 325-337.
7.
Bond, Z.S., & Robey, R.R. (1983). The phonetic structure of errors in the perception of fluent speech. In N. J. Lass (Ed .), Speech and language: Advances in basic research and practice (pp. 249-283). New York: Academic Press.
8.
Bradlow, A.R., Torretta, G.M., & Pisoni, D.B. (1996). Intelligibility of normal speech I: Global and fine-rained acoustic-phonetic talker characteristics. Speech Communication, 20, 255-272.
Brown, C.R., & Rubenstein, H. (1961). Test of response bias explanation of wordfrequency effect. Science, 133, 280-281.
11.
Carroll, J. (2002). StillMondegreened, still loving it. San Francisco Chronicle, August 29, 2002.
12.
Catlin, J. (1969). On the word-frequency effect. Psychological Review, 76, 504-506.
13.
Clar KE, F. R. (1960). Confidence ratings, second-choice responses, and confusion matrices in intelligibility tests. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 32, 35 - 46.
14.
Cohen, J. (1976). Random means random. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 15, 261-262.
15.
Cohen, J.D., Macwhinney, B., Flatt, M., & Provost, J. (1993). PsyScope: A new graphic interactive environment for designing psychology experiments. Behavioral Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers, 25, 257-271.
16.
Cutler, A. (1982). Slips of the tongue and language production. Berlin: Mouton.
17.
Cutler, A., & Butterfield, S. (1992). Rhythmic cues to speech segmentation: Evidence from juncture misperception. Journal of Memory & Language, 31, 218-236.
18.
Cutler, A., & Carter, D.M. (1987). The predominance of strong initial syllables in the English vocabulary. Computer Speech and Language, 2, 133-142.
19.
Cutler, A., & Norris, D. (1988). The role of strong syllables in segmentation for lexical access. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 14, 113-121.
20.
De-Bodt, M.S., Hernandez-Diaz-Huici, M.E. , & Van-De-Heyning, P.H. (2002). Intelligibility as a linear combination of dimensions in dysarthric speech. Journal of Communication Disorders, 35, 283-292.
21.
Denes, P. (1955). Effect of duration on the perception of voicing . Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 27, 761-764.
22.
Drager, K.D.R., & Reichle, J.E. (2001). Effects of discourse context on the intelligibility of synthesized speech for young adult and older adult listeners: Applications for AAC. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research , 44, 1052-1057.
23.
Dylan, B. (1962). Blowin' in the wind. On The Freewheelin' Bob Dylan [CD]. New York: Columbia Records (1963).
24.
Edwards, G. (1998). Deck the halls with Buddy Holly: And other misheard Christmas lyrics. Harper Perennial.
25.
Fay, D., & Cutler, A. (1977). Malapropisms and the structure of the mental lexicon . Linguistic Inquiry, 8, 505-520.
26.
Fowler, C.A., & Housum, J. (1987). Talkers'signaling of "new" and "old" words in speech and listeners' perception and use of the distinction. Journal of Memory and Language, 26, 489-504.
27.
From Kin, V. (1980). Errors in linguistic performance: Slips of the tongue, ear, pen and hand. New York: Academic Press.
28.
Gagne, J.P., Stelmacovich, P., & Yovetich, W. (1991). Reactions to requests for clarification used by hearing-impaired individuals. The Volta Review, 93, 129-143.
29.
Garnes, S., & Bond, Z.S. (1980). A slip of the ear: A snip of the ear? A slip of the year? In V. Fromkin (Ed.), Errors in linguistic performance: Slips of the tongue, ear, pen and hand (pp.231-239). New York: Academic Press.
30.
Goh, W.D., & Pisoni, D.B. (in press). Effects of lexical competition on immediate memory span for spoken words. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Experimental Psychology.
31.
Goldiamond, I., & Hawkins, W.F. (1958). Vexierversuch: The logarithmic relationship between word-frequency and recognition obtained in the absence of stimuluswords. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 56, 457-463.
32.
Grosjean, F. (1980). Spoken word recognition and the gating paradigm . Perception and Psychophysics, 28, 267-283.
33.
Haan, H.J. (1977). A speech-rate intelligibility threshold for speeded and time-compressed connected speech. Perception and Psychophysics , 22, 366-372.
34.
Harley, T.A., & Bown, H.E. (1998). What causes a tip-of-the-tongue state? Evidence for lexical neighborhood effects in speech production. British Journal of Psychology, 89,151-174.
35.
Hendrix, J. (1967). Purple Haze. On Are you experienced? [CD]. New York: Experience Hendrix/MCA Records .
36.
Hino, Y., & Lupker, S.J. (2000). Effects of word frequency and spelling-to-sound regularity in naming with and without preceding lexical decision. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance , 26, 166-183.
37.
Keppel, G. (1976). Words as random variables. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 15, 263-265.
38.
Kirk, K.I., Pisoni, D.B., & Miyamoto, R.C. (1997). Effects of stimulus variability on speech perception in listeners with hearing impairment. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 40, 1395-1405.
39.
Kuĉera, H., & Francis, W.N. (1967). Computational analysis of present-day American English. Providence, RI: Brown University Press.
40.
Landauer, T.K., & Streeter, L.A. (1973). Structural differences between common and rare words: Failure of equivalence assumptions for theories of word recognition. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 12, 119-131.
41.
Levelt, W. J. M ., Roelofs, A., & Meyer, A.S. (1999). A theory of lexical access in speech production . Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 22, 1-38.
42.
Lieberman, P. (1963). Some effects of semantic and grammatical context on the production and perception of speech. Language and Speech , 6, 172-187.
43.
Luce, P.A., Goldinger, S.D., Auer, E.T., Jr., & Vitevitch, M.S. (2000). Phonetic priming effects in spoken word shadowing. Perception and Psychophysics, 62, 615-625.
44.
Luce, P.A., & Pisoni, D.B. (1998). Recognizing spoken words: The neighborhood activation model. Ear and Hearing, 19, 1-36.
45.
Luce, P.A., Pisoni, D.B., & Goldinger, S.D. (1990). Similarity neighborhoods of spoken words. In G. T. M. Altmann (Ed.), Cognitive models of speech processing: Psycholinguistic and computational perspectives. (pp. 142 - 147) Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
46.
Mackay, D.G. (1972). The structure of words and syllables: Evidence from errors in speech. Cognitive Psychology, 3, 210-227.
47.
Mandler, G., Goodman, G.O., & Wilkes-Gibbs, D.L. (1982). The word-frequency paradox in recognition. Memory & Cognition, 10, 33-42.
48.
Marslen-Wilson, W.D., & Zwitserlood, P. (1989). Accessing spoken words: The importance of word onsets. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 15, 576-585.
49.
McClelland, J.L., & Elman, J.L. (1986). The TRACE model of speech perception. Cognitive Psychology, 18, 1-86.
50.
McClelland, J.L., Rumelhart, D.E., & Hinton, G.E. (1986). The appeal of parallel distributed processing . In D. E. Rumelhart, J. L. McClelland, & the PDP Research Group (Eds.), Parallel distributed processing: Explorations in the microstructure of cognition. Volume 1: Foundations. MIT Press. (pp.3-44.)
51.
Metz, D.E., & Schiavetti, N. (1994). Current and future directions in research on speech intelligibility assessment of persons who are deaf. Journal of the Academy of Rehabilitative Audiology, 27, 237-249.
52.
Miller, J.L., Aibel, I.L., & Green, K. (1984). On the nature of rate-dependent processing during phonetic perception. Perception and Psychophysics, 35, 5-15.
53.
Miller, J.L., & Dexter, E.R. (1988). Effects of speaking rate and lexical status on phonetic perception. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 14, 369-378.
54.
Miller, J.L., & Grosjean, F. (1981). How the components of speaking rate influence perception of phonetic segments. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 7, 208-215.
55.
Miller, G.A., & Nicely, P.E. (1955). Analysis of perceptual confusions among some English consonants. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 27, 338-353.
56.
Miller, J.L., & Volaitis, L.E. (1989). Effect of speaking rate on the perceptual structure of a phonetic category. Perception and Psychophysics, 46, 505-512.
57.
Moon, S.J., & Lindblom, B. (1994). Interaction between Duration, Context, and Speaking Style in English Stressed Vowels. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 96, 40-55.
58.
Newbigging, P.L. (1961). The perceptual redintegration of frequent and infrequent words. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 15, 123-132.
Nusbaum, H.C., Pisoni, D.B., & Davis, C.K. (1984).Sizing up the Hoosier mental lexicon: Measuring the familiarity of 20, 000 words. Research on Speech Perception, Progress Report no. 10. Speech Research Laboratory. Psychology Department, Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana.
61.
Oldfield, R.C., & Wingfield, A. (1965). Response latencies in naming objects. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 17, 273-281.
62.
Picheny, M., Durlach, N., & Braida, L. (1986). Speaking clearly for the hard of hearing II: Acoustic characteristics of clear and conversational speech, Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 29, 434-446.
63.
Pollack, I., Ruben Stein, H., & Decker, L. (1960). Intelligibility of known and unknown message sets . Journal of Acoustical Society of America, 31, 273-259.
64.
Raaijmakers, J.G.W., Schrijnemakers, J.M.C., & Gremmen, F. (1999). How to deal with "The language-as-fixed-effect fallacy"; Common misconceptions and alternative solutions. Journal of Memory and Language, 41, 416-426.
65.
Roodenrys, S., Hulme, C., Lethbridge, A., Hinton, M., & Nimmo, L.M. (2002). Word frequency and phonological neighborhood effects on verbal short-term memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 28, 1019-1034.
66.
Savin, H.B. (1963). Word-frequency effect and errors in the perception of speech. Journal of Acoustical Society of America, 35, 200-206.
67.
Shattuck-Hufnagel, S., & Klatt, D. (1979). The limited use of distinctive features and markedness in speech production: Evidence from speech error data. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 18, 41-55.
68.
Smith, J.E.K. (1976). Theassuming-will-make-it-sofallacy. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 15, 262-263.
69.
Solomon, R.L., & Postman, L. (1952). Frequency of usage as a determinant of recognition thresholds for words. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 43, 195-201.
70.
Sommers, M.S. (1996). The structural organization of the mental lexicon and its contribution to age-related declines in spoken-word recognition. Psychology and Aging, 11, 333-341.
71.
Sommers, M.S., & Danielson, S.M. (1999).Inhibitory processes and spoken word recognition in young and older adults: The interaction of lexical competition and semantic context. Psychology and Aging, 14, 458-472.
72.
Stemberger, J.P. (1992). The reliability and replicability of naturalistic speech error data: A comparison with experimentally induced errors. In B. J. Baars (Ed.), Experimental slips and human error: Exploring the architecture of volition. New York: Plenum Press. (pp.195-215.)
73.
Triesman, M. (1971).On the word frequency effect: Comments on the papers byJ. Catlin and L. H. Nakatani. PsychologicalReview, 78, 420-425.
74.
Triesman, M. (1978a). A theory of the identification of complex stimuli with an application to word recognition. Psychological Review , 85, 525-570.
75.
Triesman, M. (1978b). Space or lexicon? The word frequency effect and the error response frequency effect. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 17, 37-59.
76.
Tye-Murray, N. (1991). Repair strategy usage by hearing-impaired adults and changes following communication therapy. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 34, 921-928.
77.
Tye-Murray, N., Barkmeier, J., & Folkins, J.W. (1991). Scaling and transcription measures of intelligibility for populations with disordered speech. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 34, 697-699.
78.
Tye-Murray, N., Knutson, J.F., & Lemke, J.H. (1993). Assessment of communication strategies use: Questionnaires and daily diaries. Seminars in Hearing, 14, 338-353.
79.
Tye-Murray, N., & Witt, S. (1997). Communication strategies training. Seminars in Hearing, 18, 153-165.
80.
Tye-Murray, N., Witt, S., & Castelloe, J. (1996). Initial evaluation of an interactive test of sentence gist recognition. Journal of the American Academy of Audiology , 7, 396-405.
81.
Van Bergem, D.R. (1995). Perceptual and acoustic aspectsof lexical vowel reduction, a sound change in progress. Speech Communication , 16, 329-358.
82.
Vitevitch, M.S. (1997). The neighborhood characteristics of malapropisms . Language and Speech, 40, 211-228.
83.
Vitevitch, M.S. (2002a). The influence of phonological similarity neighborhoods on speech production. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 28, 735-747.
84.
Vitevitch, M.S. (2002b). The influence of onset-density on spoken word recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 28, 270-278.
85.
Vitevitch, M.S., & Luce, P.A. (1998). When words compete: Levels of processing in perception of spoken words. Psychological Science, 9, 325-329.
86.
Vitevitch, M.S., & Luce, P.A. (1999). Probabilistic phonotactics and neighborhood activation in spoken word recognition. Journal of Memory and Language , 40, 374-408.
87.
Vitevitch, M.S., & Sommers, M. (in press). The facilitative influence of phonological similarity and neighborhood frequency in speech production in younger and older adults. Memory & Cognition.
88.
Voss, B. (1984). Slips of the ear: Investigations into the speech perception behavior of German speakers of English. Tubingen , Germany: Gunter Narr Verlag.
89.
Wayland, S.C., Miller, J.L., & Volaitis, L.E. (1994). The influence of sentential speaking rate on the internal structure of phonetic categories. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 95, 2694-2701.
90.
Wike, E.L., & Church, J.D. (1976). Comments on Clark's "The language-as-fixed-effectfallacy."Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 15, 249-255.
91.
Wright, C.E. (1979). Duration differences between rare and common words and their implications for the interpretation of word frequency effects. Memory & Cognition, 7, 411-419.
92.
Zipf, G.K. (1935). The psycho-biology of language: An introduction to dynamic philology. New York: Houghton Mifflin.
