Background/Aims: This study investigates the effects of familiarization on naïve listeners' ability to identify consonants in dysarthric speech. Methods: A total of 120 listeners (30 listeners/speaker) participated in experiments over a 6-week period. Listeners were randomly assigned to one of the three familiarization conditions: a passive condition in which listeners heard audio recordings of words, an active condition in which listeners heard audio recordings of words while viewing the written material of words, and a control condition in which listeners had no exposure to the audio signal prior to identification tasks. Results: Familiarization improved naïve listeners' ability to identify consonants produced by a speaker with dysarthria. The active familiarization method exhibited an advantage over the other conditions, in terms of the magnitude and rapidness of improvement. One-month delayed test scores were higher than pre-familiarization scores, but the advantage of active familiarization was not present for all speakers. Conclusion: This study supports familiarization benefits in enhancing consonant intelligibility in dysarthria and suggests that perceptual learning mechanisms be harnessed for developing effective listener-oriented intervention techniques in the management of dysarthria. Current findings call for further research on a familiarization protocol that can subserve segmental learning with maximum efficacy.

1.
D'Innocenzo J, Tjaden K, Greenman G: Intelligibility in dysarthria: effects of listener familiarity and speaking condition. Clin Linguist Phon 2006;20:659-675.
2.
Borrie SA, McAuliffe MJ, Liss JM, Kirk C, O'Beirne GA, Anderson T: Familiarisation conditions and the mechanisms that underlie improved recognition of dysarthric speech. Lang Cogn Process 2012;27:1039-1055.
3.
Borrie SA, McAuliffe MJ, Liss JM: Perceptual learning of dysarthric speech: a review of experimental studies. J Speech Lang Hear Res 2012;55:290-305.
4.
Hustad KC, Cahill MA: Effects of presentation mode and repeated familiarization on intelligibility of dysarthric speech. Am J Speech Lang Pathol 2003;12:198-208.
5.
Kim H, Nanney S: Familiarization effects on word intelligibility in dysarthric speech. Folia Phoniatr Logop 2014;66:258-264.
6.
Liss JM, Spitzer SM, Caviness JN, Adler C: The effects of familiarization on intelligibility and lexical segmentation in hypokinetic and ataxic dysarthria. J Acoust Soc Am 2002;11:2-6.
7.
Spitzer SM, Liss JM, Caviness JN, Adler C: An exploration of familiarization effects in the perception of hypokinetic and ataxic dysarthric speech. J Med Speech Lang Pathol 2000;8:285-293.
8.
Tjaden K, Liss JM: The role of listener familiarity in the perception of dysarthric speech. Clin Linguist Phon 1995;9:139-154.
9.
Tjaden K, Liss JM: The influence of familiarity on judgments of treated speech. Am J Speech Lang Pathol 1995;4:39-48.
10.
Yorkston KM, Beukelman DR: The influence of judge familiarization with the speaker on dysarthric speech intelligibility; in Berry W (ed): Clinical Dysarthria. Austin, Pro-Ed, 1983, pp 155-164.
11.
Garcia JM, Cannito MP: Influence of verbal and nonverbal contexts on the sentence intelligibility of a speaker with dysarthria. J Speech Hear Res 1996;39:750-760.
12.
Bradlow AR, Bent T: Perceptual adaptation to non-native speech. Cognition 2008;106:707-729.
13.
Gass S, Varonis EM: The effect of familiarity on the comprehensibility of nonnative speech. Lang Learn 1984;34:65-89.
14.
Weill SA: Foreign accented speech: encoding and generalization. J Acoust Soc Am 2001;109:2473.
15.
Ellis LW, Beltyukova SA: Effects of training on naïve listeners' judgments of the speech intelligibility of children with severe-to-profound hearing loss. J Speech Lang Hear Res 2008;51:1114-1123.
16.
Loebach JL, Pisoni DB, Svirsky MA: Effects of semantic context and feedback on perceptual learning of speech processed through an acoustic simulation of a cochlear implant. J Exp Psychol 2010;36:224-234.
17.
McGarr NS: The intelligibility of deaf speech to experienced and inexperienced listeners. J Speech Hear Res 1983;26:451-458.
18.
Francis AL, Nusbaum HC, Fenn K: Effects of training on the acoustic phonetic representation of synthetic speech. J Speech Lang Hear Res 2007;50:1445-1465.
19.
McNaughton D, Fallon K, Tod J, Weiner F, Neisworth J: Effect of repeated listening experiences on the intelligibility of synthesized speech. Augment Altern Commun 1994;10:161-168.
20.
Schwab EC, Nusbaum HC, Pisoni DB: Some effects of training on the perception of synthetic speech. Hum Factors 1985;27:395-408.
21.
Venkatagiri H: Effect of sentence length and exposure on the intelligibility of synthesized speech. Augment Altern Commun 1994;10:96-104.
22.
Davis MH, Johnsrude IS, Hervais-Adelman A, Taylor K, McGettigan C: Lexical information drives perceptual learning of distorted speech: evidence from the comprehension of noise-vocoded sentences. J Exp Psychol Gen 2005;134:222-241.
23.
Golomb, JD, Peelle JE, Wingfield A: Effects of stimulus variability and adult aging on adaption to time-compressed speech. J Acoust Soc Am 2007;121:1701-1708.
24.
Pallier C, Sebastian-Galles N, Dupoux E, Christophe A: Perceptual adjustment to time-compressed speech: a cross-linguistic study. Mem Cognit 1998;26:844-851.
25.
Sebastian-Galles N, Dupoux E, Costa A, Mehler J: Adaptation to time-compressed speech: phonological determinants. Percept Psychophys 2000;62:834-842.
26.
Miller N: Measuring up to speech intelligibility. Int J Lang Commun Disord 2013;48:601-612.
27.
Mattys SL: Speech perception; in Daniel R (ed): The Oxford Handbook of Cognitive Psychology. Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2011.
28.
Nygaard LC, Pisoni DB: Talker-specific learning in speech perception. Percept Psychophys 1998;60:355-376.
29.
Yonan CA, Sommers MS: The effects of talker familiarity on spoken word identification in younger and older listeners. Psychol Aging 2000;15:88-99.
30.
Loebach JL, Bent T, Pisoni DB: Multiple routes to the perceptual learning of speech. J Acoust Soc Am 2008;124:552-561.
31.
Borrie SA, McAuliffe MJ, Liss JM, O'Beirne GA, Anderson TJ: The role of linguistic and indexical information in improved recognition of dysarthric speech. J Acoust Soc Am 2013;133:474-482.
32.
Dupoux E, Green K: Perceptual adjustment to highly compressed speech: effects of talker and rate changes. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 1997;23:914-927.
33.
Greenspan SL, Nusbaum HC, Pisoni DB: Perceptual learning of synthetic speech. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn 1988;14:421-433.
34.
Pisoni DB, Lively SE, Logan JS: Perceptual learning of nonnative speech contrasts: implications for theories of speech perception; in Nusbaum HC, Goodman J (eds): The Development of Speech Perception: The Transition from Speech Sounds to Spoken Words. Cambridge, Mass., MIT Press, 1994, pp 121-166.
35.
Nishi K, Kewley-Port D: Training Japanese listeners to perceive American English vowels: influence of training sets. J Speech Lang Hear Res 2007;50:1496-1509.
36.
Nishi K, Kewley-Port D: Nonnative speech perception training using vowel subsets: effects of vowels in sets and order of training. J Speech Lang Hear Res 2008;51:1480-1493.
37.
Eisner F, McQueen JM: The specificity of perceptual learning in speech processing. Percept Psychophys 2005;67:224-238.
38.
Kraljic T, Samuel AG: Generalization in perceptual learning for speech. Psychon Bull Rev 2006;13:262-268.
39.
Norris D, McQueen JM, Cutler A: Perceptual learning in speech. Cogn Psychol 2003;47:204-238.
40.
Samuel AG, Kraljic T: Perceptual learning for speech. Atten Percept Psychophys 2009;71:1207-1218.
41.
Kim H, Hasegawa-Johnson M, Perlman A, Gunderson J, Huang T, Watkin K, Frame S: Dysarthric speech database for universal access research. Proceedings of Inter Speech Conference, September 22-26, 2008, Brisbane, Australia.
42.
Boersma P, Weenink D: Praat: doing phonetics by computer (version 5.1.15), 2009. http://www.praat.org/.
43.
Bakeman R: Recommended effect size statistics for repeated measures designs. Behav Res Methods 2005;37:379-384.
44.
Gipson EJ: Principles of perceptual learning and development. New York, Prentice Hall College Div, 1969.
45.
Kim H, Nanney S: Relationship between the spectral characteristics of fricatives and familiarization-induced intelligibility enhancement. ASHA Annual Convention, November 20-22, 2014, Orlando, Fla., USA.
46.
Barlow JA, Gierut JA: Minimal pair approaches to phonological remediation. Semin Speech Lang 2002;23:57-67.
47.
Gierut JA: Enhancement of learning for children with phonological disorders; in Slifka J, Manuel S, Matthies M (eds): From Sound to Sense: 50+ Years of Discoveries in Speech Communication. Cambridge, Mass., MIT Press, 2004, pp 164-172.
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.