Cover not available

Article published In: The Mental Lexicon
Vol. 10:3 (2015) ► pp.435–457

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload PDF
authorization required

Segmented binaural presentation as a means to examine lexical substructure

 | Brock University
 | Brock University
Published online: 15 March 2016
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/ml.10.3.06ted
We present an auditory presentation technique called segmented binaural presentation. The technique builds on the dichotic listening paradigm (Shankweiler & Studdert-Kennedy, 1967; Studdert-Kennedy & Shankweiler, 1970) and segmented lexical presentation (Libben, 2003; Betram, Kuperman, Baayen, & Hyönä, 2011). The technique allows the first part of a word to be presented to one ear and the second part of the word to be presented to the other ear. The experimenter may thus manipulate whether a stimulus is segmented in this binaural manner and, if it is segmented, the location of the binaural segmentation within the word. We discuss how the technique may be implemented on the Macintosh platform, using PsyScope and freely available software for audio file creation. We also report on a test implementation of the technique using suffixed and compound English words in a lexical decision task. Results suggest that the technique differentiates between segmentation that occurs within and between compound constituents.
References (38)
Audacity Team. (2013). Audacity®(Version 2.0.5). [Computer program]. Retrieved February 10, 2014, from [URL]
Bates, D., Maechler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S. (2015). lme4: Linear mixed-effects models using Eigen and S4. R package version 1.1–9, [URL].Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bertram, R., Kuperman, V., Baayen, R.H., & Hyönä, J. (2011). The hyphen as a segmentation cue in triconstituent compound processing: It’s getting better all the time. Scandinavian journal of psychology, 52(6), 530–544. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Brysbaert, M., Vitu, F., & Schroyens, W. (1996). The right visual field advantage and the Optimal Viewing Position Effect: On the relation between foveal and parafoveal word recognition. Neuropsychology, 10(3), 385–395. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Brysbaert, M., & Nazir, T. (2005). Visual constraints in written word recognition: Evidence from the optimal viewing-position effect. Journal of Research in Reading, 281, 216–228. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
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(2), 257–271. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cohen, L., & Mehler, J. (1996). Click monitoring revisited: An on-line study of sentence comprehension. Memory & cognition, 24(1), 94–102. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cutler, A., & Norris, D. (1979). Monitoring sentence comprehension. In W.E. Cooper & E.C.T. Walker (Eds.), Sentence processing: Psycholinguistic studies presented to Merrill Garrett (pp. 113–134). Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Faust, M., Kravetz, S., & Babkoff, H. (1993). Hemispheric specialization or reading habits: Evidence from lexical decision research with Hebrew words and sentences. Brain and Language, 441, 254–263. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fodor, J.A., & Bever, T.G. (1965). The psychological reality of linguistic segments. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 41, 414–420. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gordon, D.P., & Zatorre, R.J. (1981). A right-ear advantage for dichotic listening in bilingual children. Brain and Language, 13(2), 389–396. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Holmes, V.M., & Forster, K.I. (1972). Click location and syntactic structure. Perception & Psychophysics, 12(1), 9–15. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hugdahl, K. (2011). Fifty years of dichotic listening research – Still going and going and… Brain and Cognition, 761, 211–213. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. (2000). Lateralization of cognitive processing in the brain. Acta Psychologica, 1051, 211–235. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ip, K., & Hoosain, R. (1993). Dichotic listening of Chinese and English words. Psychologia: An International Journal of Psychology in the Orient, 36(3), 140–143.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Keuleers, E., & Brysbaert, M. (2010). Wuggy: A multilingual pseudoword generator. Behavior Research Methods, 42(3), 627–633. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kimura, D. (2011). From ear to brain. Brain and Cognition, 761, 214–217. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. (1967). Functional asymmetry of the brain in dichotic listening. Cortex, 31, 163–168. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. (1966). Dual functional asymmetry of the brain in visual perception. Neuropsychologia, 41, 275–285. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. (1961a). Some effects of temporal-lobe damage on auditory perception. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 151, 156–165. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. (1961b). Cerebral dominance and the perception of verbal stimuli. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 151, 166–170. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ladefoged, P., & Broadbent, D.E. (1960). Perception of sequence in auditory events. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 12(3), 162–170. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Laine, M., & Koivisto, M. (1998). Lexical access to inflected words as measured by lateralized visual lexical decision. Psychological Research, 611, 220–229. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Leff, A. (2004). A historical review of the representation of the visual field in primary visual cortex with special reference to the neural mechanisms underlying macular sparing. Brain and Language, 881, 268–278. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Libben, G. (2003). Morphological Parsing and Morphological Structure. In E.M.H. Assink & D. Sandra (Eds.), Reading complex words: Cross language studies (pp. 221–239). New York: Kluwer Academic. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Moen, I. (1993). Functional lateralization of the perception of Norwegian Word Tones – Evidence from a dichotic listening Experiment. Brain and Language, 44(4), 400–413. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Meyers, J.E., Roberts, R.J., Bayless, J.D., Volkert, K., & Evitts, P.E. (2002). Dichotic listening: expanded norms and clinical application. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 17(1), 79–90. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
O’Regan, J.K., & Jacobs, A.M. (1992). Optimal viewing position effect in word recognition: A challenge to current theory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 181, 185–197. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
R Core Team. (2014). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. URL [URL]Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Reber, A.S. (1973). Locating clicks in sentences: Left, center, and right. Perception and Psychophysics, 13(1), 133–138. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Saetrevik, B., & Hugdahl, K. (2007). Priming inhibits the right ear advantage in dichotic listening: Implications for auditory laterality. Neuropsychologia, 451, 282–287. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Shankweiler, D., & Studdert-Kennedy, M. (1967). Identification of consonants and vowels presented to left and right ears. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 191, 59–63. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Studdert-Kennedy, M., & Shankweiler, D. (1970). Hemispheric specialization for speech perception. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 481, 579–594. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tremblay, A., & Ransijn, J. (2013). LMERConvenienceFunctions: A suite of functions to back-fit fixed effects and forward-fit random effects, as well as other miscellaneous functions. R package version 21.5. [URL]Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wang, Y., Jongman, A., & Sereno, J.A. (2001). Dichotic perception of Mandarin tones by Chinese and American listeners. Brain and Language, 78(3), 332–348. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Westerhausen, R., Moosmann, M., Alho, K., Medvedev, S., Hamalainen, H., & Hugdahl, K. (2009). Top-down and bottom-up interaction: Manipulating the dichotic listening ear advantages. Brain Research, 12501, 183–189 Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wexler, B.E., & Halwes, T. (1983). Increasing the power of dichotic methods: The fused rhymed words test. Neuropsychologia, 211, 59–66. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Young, A.W., & Ellis, A.W. (1985). Different methods of lexical access for words presented in the left and right visual hemifields. Brain and Language, 241, 326–358. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue