A study was undertaken to investigate the effect that learning English as a second language has on the comprehension of passages of synthetic speech in English in two listening environments: quiet and ambient noise. Participants were native speakers of English, Spanish and Vietnamese. Results indicated that participants had more difficulty comprehending the passages in ambient noise, but no significant comprehension differences were found attributable to the factor of native language.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Barron's Practice Exercises for the TOEFL: Test of English as a Foreign Language (3rd Ed). (1995). Princeton, NJ: Barron's Educational Series Inc.: Author.
2.
Environmental Protection Agency (1977). Behavioral and physiological correlates of varying noise environments, (No. EPA-6001-77-038). Office of Health and Ecological Effects, Washington, D.C: Author.
3.
LaiJ.WoodD.ConsidineM. (2000). The Effect of Task Conditions on the Comprehensibility of Synthetic Speech. Proceedings of the Conference on Human Computer Interaction 2000, pp. 321–328. The Hague: Amsterdam.
4.
LercherPEvansG.MeisM. (2003). Ambient noise and cognitive processes among primary school children. Environment and Behavior, Vol. 35, No. 6, pp. 725–735.
5.
LucePaulA.FeustelT.PisoniD. (1983). Capacity Demands in Short-term Memory for Synthetic and Natural Speech. Human Factors, Vol. 25, No. 1, pp. 17–32.
6.
MackMolly (1988). Sentence Processing by Non-native Speakers of English: Evidence from the Perception of Natural and Computer-generated Anomalous L2 Sentences. Journal of Neurolinguistics, Vol. 3, No. 2, pp. 293–316.
7.
ParisC.R.GilsonS.D.ThomasM. H.SilverN.C. (1995). Effect of Synthetic Voice Intelligibility on Speech Comprehension. Human Factors, Vol. 37, No. 2, pp. 335–340.
8.
ParisC.R.ThomasM H.GilsonR.KincaidPeter (2000). Linguistic Cues and Memory for Synthetic and Natural Speech. Human Factors, Vol. 42, No. 3, 421–431.
9.
RabbitP. (1966) Recognition: Memory for words correctly heard in noise. Psychonomic Science, Vol. 6, pp. 383–384.
10.
WaterworthJohn A.ThomasCathy M. (1985). Why is Synthetic Speech Harder to Remember Than Natural Speech?CHI Proceedings, April 1985, pp. 201–206
