Neural correlates of listening to nonnative-accented speech in multi-talker background noise

IF 4.6 Q2 MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS
Yushuang Liu , Janet G. van Hell
{"title":"Neural correlates of listening to nonnative-accented speech in multi-talker background noise","authors":"Yushuang Liu ,&nbsp;Janet G. van Hell","doi":"10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2024.108968","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>We examined the neural correlates underlying the semantic processing of native- and nonnative-accented sentences, presented in quiet or embedded in multi-talker noise. Implementing a semantic violation paradigm, 36 English monolingual young adults listened to American-accented (native) and Chinese-accented (nonnative) English sentences with or without semantic anomalies, presented in quiet or embedded in multi-talker noise, while EEG was recorded. After hearing each sentence, participants verbally repeated the sentence, which was coded and scored as an offline comprehension accuracy measure. In line with earlier behavioral studies, the negative impact of background noise on sentence repetition accuracy was higher for nonnative-accented than for native-accented sentences. At the neural level, the N400 effect for semantic anomaly was larger for native-accented than for nonnative-accented sentences, and was also larger for sentences presented in quiet than in noise, indicating impaired lexical-semantic access when listening to nonnative-accented speech or sentences embedded in noise. No semantic N400 effect was observed for nonnative-accented sentences presented in noise. Furthermore, the frequency of neural oscillations in the alpha frequency band (an index of online cognitive listening effort) was higher when listening to sentences in noise versus in quiet, but no difference was observed across the accent conditions. Semantic anomalies presented in background noise also elicited higher theta activity, whereas processing nonnative-accented anomalies was associated with decreased theta activity. Taken together, we found that listening to nonnative accents or background noise is associated with processing challenges during online semantic access, leading to decreased comprehension accuracy. However, the underlying cognitive mechanism (e.g., associated listening efforts) might manifest differently across accented speech processing and speech in noise processing.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":2,"journal":{"name":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0028393224001830","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

We examined the neural correlates underlying the semantic processing of native- and nonnative-accented sentences, presented in quiet or embedded in multi-talker noise. Implementing a semantic violation paradigm, 36 English monolingual young adults listened to American-accented (native) and Chinese-accented (nonnative) English sentences with or without semantic anomalies, presented in quiet or embedded in multi-talker noise, while EEG was recorded. After hearing each sentence, participants verbally repeated the sentence, which was coded and scored as an offline comprehension accuracy measure. In line with earlier behavioral studies, the negative impact of background noise on sentence repetition accuracy was higher for nonnative-accented than for native-accented sentences. At the neural level, the N400 effect for semantic anomaly was larger for native-accented than for nonnative-accented sentences, and was also larger for sentences presented in quiet than in noise, indicating impaired lexical-semantic access when listening to nonnative-accented speech or sentences embedded in noise. No semantic N400 effect was observed for nonnative-accented sentences presented in noise. Furthermore, the frequency of neural oscillations in the alpha frequency band (an index of online cognitive listening effort) was higher when listening to sentences in noise versus in quiet, but no difference was observed across the accent conditions. Semantic anomalies presented in background noise also elicited higher theta activity, whereas processing nonnative-accented anomalies was associated with decreased theta activity. Taken together, we found that listening to nonnative accents or background noise is associated with processing challenges during online semantic access, leading to decreased comprehension accuracy. However, the underlying cognitive mechanism (e.g., associated listening efforts) might manifest differently across accented speech processing and speech in noise processing.

在多人交谈的背景噪声中聆听非母语口音语音的神经相关性。
我们研究了母语和非母语语音句子的语义处理所依赖的神经相关性,这些句子是在安静的环境中或在多人交谈的噪音中呈现的。通过语义违规范式,36 名英语单语青壮年聆听了带有或不带有语义异常的美式口音(母语)和中式口音(非母语)英语句子,这些句子在安静的环境中或在多人交谈的噪音中出现,同时对脑电图进行了记录。听完每个句子后,受试者口头复述句子,并对其进行编码和评分,作为离线理解准确性的衡量标准。与之前的行为学研究一致,背景噪声对非母语口音句子复述准确性的负面影响高于母语口音句子。在神经水平上,母语口音句子的语义异常 N400 效应大于非母语口音句子,而且在安静环境下呈现的句子的语义异常 N400 效应也大于噪音环境下呈现的句子。而在噪音中出现的非母语口音句子则没有出现语义 N400 效应。此外,在聆听噪音中的句子时,α频段的神经振荡频率(在线认知聆听努力的指标)高于在安静环境中聆听句子时的神经振荡频率,但在不同口音条件下没有观察到差异。在背景噪音中出现的语义异常也会引起较高的θ活动,而处理非母语口音的异常则会导致θ活动减少。综上所述,我们发现,听非母语口音或背景噪音与在线语义访问过程中的处理挑战有关,从而导致理解准确性下降。然而,潜在的认知机制(如相关的倾听努力)可能会在重音语音处理和噪音语音处理中表现出不同。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
ACS Applied Bio Materials
ACS Applied Bio Materials Chemistry-Chemistry (all)
CiteScore
9.40
自引率
2.10%
发文量
464
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信