Perceptual bias in speech error data collection: insights from Spanish speech errors.
Perceptual bias in speech error data collection: insights from Spanish speech errors.
复制标题
语音错误数据收集中的感知偏差：来自西班牙语语音错误的见解。
DOI：
10.1007/s10936-006-9042-7
复制
发表时间：
2007
影响因子：
2
通讯作者：
O'Seaghdha,PadraigG
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Pérez,Elvira;Santiago,Julio;Palma,Alfonso;O'Seaghdha,PadraigG
本文研究了自然主义言语错误作为语言产出研究工具的信度和效度。确定了收集自然主义言语错误时可能存在的偏见，并得出了具体的预测。然后将这些模式与日耳曼语言(英语、德语和荷兰语)和一种罗曼语(西班牙语)发表的报告进行对比。与日耳曼语的研究结果不同，西班牙语的语音错误表现出许多与偏差预期相反的模式：(1)单词之间的语音错误比单词内部的语音错误更多；(2)单词的声母比单词的中间辅音更容易出错；(3)重读音节和非重读音节中的错误同等可能；(4)持久化比预期更频繁；(5)没有任何词汇偏见的痕迹。我们提供了一个新的西班牙语言语错误语料库，这些语料库是由许多理论上天真的观察者收集的(而到目前为止可用的唯一语料库是由两个训练有素的理论上知情的观察者收集的)，给出了它的一般概述，并用它来复制以前的报告。尽管这些方法对偏见的敏感性不同，但在这两个语料库中，结果非常相似，再次与偏见的预测相反。因此，即使在使用多收集器的方法时，“在野外”收集语音错误似乎也在合理的程度上没有偏见。观察到的西班牙语和日耳曼语之间的对比模式是真正的跨语言差异。
This paper studies the reliability and validity of naturalistic speech errors as a tool for language production research. Possible biases when collecting naturalistic speech errors are identified and specific predictions derived. These patterns are then contrasted with published reports from Germanic languages (English, German and Dutch) and one Romance language (Spanish). Unlike findings in the Germanic languages, Spanish speech errors show many patterns which run contrary to those expected from bias: (1) more phonological errors occur between words than within word; (2) word-initial consonants are less likely to participate in errors than word-medial consonants, (3) errors are equally likely in stressed and in unstressed syllables, (4) perseverations are more frequent than anticipations, and (5) there is no trace of a lexical bias. We present a new corpus of Spanish speech errors collected by many theoretically naïve observers (whereas the only corpus available so far was collected by two highly trained theoretically informed observers), give a general overview of it, and use it to replicate previous reports. In spite of the different susceptibility of these methods to bias, results were remarkably similar in both corpora and again contrary to predictions from bias. As a result, collecting speech errors “in the wild” seems to be free of bias to a reasonable extent even when using a multiple-collector method. The observed contrasting patterns between Spanish and Germanic languages arise as true cross-linguistic differences.