Article  |   February 2012
Comparing Identification of Standardized and Regionally Valid Vowels
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Richard Wright
    University of Washington, Seattle
    University of Washington, Seattle
  • Pamela Souza
    Northwestern University, Chicago, IL
    Northwestern University, Chicago, IL
  • Correspondence to Pamela Souza: p-souza@northwestern.edu
  • Editor: Robert Schlauch
    Editor: Robert Schlauch×
  • Associate Editor: Mark Hedrick
    Associate Editor: Mark Hedrick×
Special Populations / Cultural & Linguistic Diversity / Speech, Voice & Prosody / Hearing
Article   |   February 2012
Comparing Identification of Standardized and Regionally Valid Vowels
Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research February 2012, Vol.55, 182-193. doi:10.1044/1092-4388(2011/10-0278)
History: Accepted 03 Jun 2011 , Received 04 Oct 2010 , Revised 14 Mar 2011
Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research February 2012, Vol.55, 182-193. doi:10.1044/1092-4388(2011/10-0278)
History: Accepted 03 Jun 2011 , Received 04 Oct 2010 , Revised 14 Mar 2011

Purpose: In perception studies, it is common to use vowel stimuli from standardized recordings or synthetic stimuli created using values from well-known published research. Although the use of standardized stimuli is convenient, unconsidered dialect and regional accent differences may introduce confounding effects. The goal of this study was to examine the effect of regional accent variation on vowel identification.

Method: The authors analyzed formant values of 8 monophthong vowels produced by 12 talkers from the region where the research took place and compared them with standardized vowels. Fifteen listeners with normal hearing identified synthesized vowels presented in varying levels of noise and at varying spectral distances from the local-dialect values.

Results: Acoustically, local vowels differed from standardized vowels, and distance varied across vowels. Perceptually, there was a robust effect of accent similarity such that identification was reduced for vowels at greater distances from local values.

Conclusions: Researchers and clinicians should take care in choosing stimuli for perception experiments. It is recommended that regionally validated vowels be used instead of relying on standardized vowels in vowel perception tasks.

Order a Subscription
Pay Per View
Entire Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research content & archive
24-hour access
This Article
24-hour access

Related Articles

The Effects of Indexical and Phonetic Variation on Vowel Perception in Typically Developing 9- to 12-Year-Old Children
Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research April 2014, Vol., 1-17. doi:10.1044/2014_JSLHR-S-12-0248
Glimpses: Building on Boo-Boos
The ASHA Leader April 2014, Vol.19, 10. doi:10.1044/leader.GL.19042014.10
Identification of Acoustically Similar and Dissimilar Vowels in Profoundly Deaf Adults Who Use Hearing Aids and/or Cochlear Implants: Some Preliminary Findings
American Journal of Audiology March 2014, Vol.23, 57-70. doi:10.1044/1059-0889(2013/13-0009)
Intelligibility of American English Vowels and Consonants spoken by International Students in the US
Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research March 2014, Vol., No Pagination Specified. doi:10.1044/2014_JSLHR-H-13-0047
Cross-language Perception of Japanese Vowel Length Contrasts: Comparison of Listeners from Different First Language (L1) Backgrounds
Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research February 2014, Vol., No Pagination Specified. doi:10.1044/2014_JSLHR-S-12-0416