Hostname: page-component-7c8c6479df-r7xzm Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-03-28T18:05:54.583Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

No compelling evidence against feedback in spoken word recognition

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 October 2000

Michael K. Tanenhaus
Affiliation:
Department of Brain and Cognitive Sciences, University of Rochester, Rochester, NY 14627 {mtan; magnuson; mcmurray}@bcs.rochester.eduaslin@cvs.rochester.edu www.bcs.rochester.edu
James S. Magnuson
Affiliation:
Department of Brain and Cognitive Sciences, University of Rochester, Rochester, NY 14627 {mtan; magnuson; mcmurray}@bcs.rochester.eduaslin@cvs.rochester.edu www.bcs.rochester.edu
Bob McMurray
Affiliation:
Department of Brain and Cognitive Sciences, University of Rochester, Rochester, NY 14627 {mtan; magnuson; mcmurray}@bcs.rochester.eduaslin@cvs.rochester.edu www.bcs.rochester.edu
Richard N. Aslin
Affiliation:
Department of Brain and Cognitive Sciences, University of Rochester, Rochester, NY 14627 {mtan; magnuson; mcmurray}@bcs.rochester.eduaslin@cvs.rochester.edu www.bcs.rochester.edu

Abstract

Norris et al.'s claim that feedback is unnecessary is compromised by (1) a questionable application of Occam's razor, given strong evidence for feedback in perception; (2) an idealization of the speech recognition problem that simplifies those aspects of the input that create conditions where feedback is useful; (3) Norris et al.'s use of decision nodes that incorporate feedback to model some important empirical results; and (4) problematic linking hypotheses between crucial simulations and behavioral data.

Type
Brief Report
Copyright
© 2000 Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)