linguistics speech perception data Custom Essay

What needs to be edit or added:

1)Cohort and Trace connection to literature review and data results.
2) how bottom up and top down is showed after the results you found.
3) Which one supports the autonomous? And which one the behaviourism?
4)Based on the data analysis and results you have found which one is the strongest that occurred in your situation? The bottom up or the top-down?
5) edit all the data analysis paper and conclusion mostly.

ESSAY THAT NEEDS TO BE FIXED:

Data Analysis:
Participants:
In this project a number of no more than 20 individuals, 10 men and 10 women of the same range age 20 until 30’s will be observed while recording them on speech perception. The participant’s task will be to hear a recording by a native speaker of English reading five predictable and five unpredictable sentences. The recording will be played in sentences pairs, mixed up, in order for each individual to hear one predictable sentence and one unpredictable. People, then will have to repeat exactly what they heard during the recording in clear enunciation.
Hypothesis:
The hypothesis, of this task is to test the theories on speech perception and phonemic restoration. More detailed is to see whether are based on their phonological abilities or on the contextual knowledge. People’s brain have the extraordinary ability to use the memory storage in almost every little thing. For example, when people are hearing a speech or are talking with someone and loud noises are in the background not being able to hear, based on the context of the subject they are able to understand or predict what words are coming next. Also, to see if the participants will correct the unpredictable sentence based on their contextual knowledge or do as correct what the task was asked them to perform.
Conditions:
The places that I have recorded my participants were in the University library, and in a coffee shop. Therefore, a graphic chart will be given at the end of this data analysis for the need of presenting better understanding results of the research.

Limitations:
The limitations of this project were mostly based on the gender, as women being more affected in informative approach and that are more influenced in the top- down processing compared to men due to women be more affected in the informative part than men. The library and coffee shop places that I have chosen, limited the experiment results, causing phonemic restoration effect and inaccuracy of results due to students studying or the participants being bored, tired, busy or even shy. Also, the sound did not helped as the recordings made were in public places and people talking on the back, or irrelevant sounds and the wind outside the coffee shop made it difficult for some participants to hear the recording. Also, another limitation was when some participants realised that they will be recorded in the full task they tried to change their first response and wanted to do the task again all over from the beginning in order to say the sentences correctly. As, Labov (1972) noted, “… an observer/recorder of a speech creates a situation in which speakers will be highly conscious of their speech and so modify it.”
Analysis: (Pie charts)
Based on the recordings the participants were very kind and willing to help some of them found the sentences a bit weird mostly the unpredictable ones. The results I have found were surprisingly interesting. Three out of ten men correct their responses; especially the one of these two changed it completely. For example the unpredictable sentence given to him was ‘We lived in the jungle with no sort of home’ and what he repeated was ‘We left in the jungle with no way home’. The other male participant must mishear the pronoun ‘He’ on the predictable sentence ‘He showed us a view of the mountains’ he said ‘She’. While another participant in the same previous sentence change the ‘a’ to ‘the’. Seven out ten male participants were absolutely correct on the repeating process, however they some of them were more careful and tried to repeat as exactly as they heard the recording either by talking slower with clear enunciation or by talking louder. On the other hand the female group that were tested two out ten women correct their repeating process. For instance, the one female participant corrected the unpredictable sentence ‘Mary bought the children home at 6 o’clock’ by saying ‘Mary brought the children home at 6 o’clock.’ The other female participant did the same error as the third male one, she change the ‘a’ to ‘the’ in the predictable sentence ‘He showed us a view of the mountains.’ The rest of the group eight out of ten women were repeated the sentences as they asked them to do so, even though they were a bit self – conscious with themselves. It is interesting to be noted that most of the women wanted to record them again in order to sound more prestigious and closer to Standard English, while one of the two participants that mistaken in the repeating process asked me whether is possible to record her again correctly, as she noticed that she made a slightly mispronunciation, although I only kept the first stimuli of each participant for trying to accomplish more valid and legit results.

Connection to Literature Review: (support your findings and discussions)
Based on the previous literature review and data analysis, language processing can be affected by the environment of each individual as much as other different variables; context, age, factors, volume and background. Also, the results of bottom-up procession is by far stronger than top-down in speech communication. For instance, bottom- up processing is highly important for better listening skills and speech is described to be processing through bottom-up where all the data and process information are based on. What is more, considering the analysis results of the participants that correct the recording that they heard was in public places were different sounds were heard on the back that limited their ability to hear correctly and repeat it. Warren (1970:392) call this Phonemic Restoration were humans memory and language skills benefit the listener to replace the sound or phoneme with the correct based on the linguistical knowledge that people have. However, the ability of people having the benefit by utilizing the information given to them or heard helps them comprehend what it was said or established even in loud noisy places that reaches you during intervals. The way people corrected the recording is based on the bottom up process were the data driven occurs and the people who corrected the unpredictable sentences relies on top- down processing were the knowledge driven takes place. Furthermore, the people who corrected their responses might be due to the segmentation problem of the assimilation of the words, which is a top-down process of the speech perception where the sentence context effects this segmentation problem of the listener. Interpretation is another factor of the top- down processing that the participants when they did not hear quite well the sounds their background knowledge fill in the missing phonemes or sounds, although Warren found that the effect was only occurred when a large unit of the sound was missing and replaced with a different one.

Conclusion:
Bottom-up and top –down processing as we covered so far are two divergent processions in human ability. The bottom-up process is perception and direct cognition or sensation like, eyes, smell, ears for the auditory part and with the top-down processing is influencing the behaviour which is influenced by the conceptual data. The success of listening and the ability of understanding and comprehension usually depend on the ability of both processing’s ‘bottom-up’ and ‘top- down’ procession. On the cohort part and TRACE , cohort studies archived perspective records, is covering historical background and studies as well as data. Is mainly a group of people who share the same characteristic experience like in this data experiment the 20 participants, although TRACE was developed by Elman and McClelland and is based on principles of interactive activation.