1/21/2024 0 Comments Goldwave 6.23 serial key![]() (2013, 2015), the stimulus materials comprised previously recorded lip-read videos of “self” and “other.” Specifically, participants were recorded while producing a set of sentences. Likewise, the benefit obtained from lip-read information when auditory speech is noisy is higher for “self” than for “other” ( Tye-Murray et al., 2015). Speech input is often audiovisual (AV) in nature: we hear the speaker’s voice (here referred to as auditory speech, or A) while we simultaneously see the corresponding articulatory lip-movements (here referred to as lip-read information, visual speech, or V).Īlthough we hardly ever see ourselves speaking, participants are better at lip-reading silent videos of themselves (i.e., “self”) than they are at lip-reading someone else (“other,” see Tye-Murray et al., 2013). These findings strengthen the emerging notion that recalibration reflects a general learning mechanism, and bolster the argument that adaptation depends on rather low-level auditory/acoustic features of the speech signal. We observed both aftereffects as well as an on-line effect of lip-read information on auditory perception (i.e., immediate capture), but there was no evidence for a “self” advantage in any of the tasks (as additionally supported by Bayesian statistics). ![]() We assessed whether there is a “self” advantage for phonetic recalibration (a lip-read driven cross-modal learning effect) and selective adaptation (a contrastive effect in the opposite direction of recalibration).
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |