The assessment tasks have been designed to enable students to demonstrate critical thinking skills and problem-solving skills in the understanding of how the auditory system works, psychoacoustics and speech perception.

Late penalties

Late submissions will receive a penalty of 5% of the total marks for the assignment per day including weekends and public holidays

Completion of All Assessment Tasks:

It is a requirement of this unit that students make a serious attempt to complete all assessment tasks. Failure to make a serious attempt to complete all assessment tasks may result in failure in the whole unit even if the total marks for completed tasks add up to more than 50%. In such cases, failure results from the learning outcomes of the unit not being met.

Any request for an extension must be submitted via ask@mq along with relevant information before the assignment deadline. Please make us aware of any circumstance that may affect your ability to complete an assessment on time. We are often able to help you manage your study load if we are aware of the situation. Granting extensions or special considerations after the fact is much more difficult.

Students must keep a copy of each assignment as proof that it was completed and submitted in the event that a submitted assignment is misplaced or damaged.

Return of Marked Assignments

Students’ marked assignments will, in general, be returned to them within 3 weeks of submission. Please note that assignments cannot be accepted after the return of marked materials.

Assignment Submission:

All assignments must be submitted via turnitin. For each assignment, you MUST:  submit the assignment in Word or pdf format  fill in and include the cover sheet  add a footer to each page of the assignment, with page numbering, your name and student number, and “SPH312” clearly marked Assignments will not be accepted unless they have both the cover sheet and the footer.

Appeals Against Grades

'If a student has a problem with the mark given for a particular assessment, the student should contact the Unit Convenor directly. A request for a re-mark must be lodged within two weeks of the date of receipt of the assessment. If a remark is granted, the final mark can be sustained, raised or lowered.

If a student wishes to appeal against a final grade for a unit, then the student should lodge their appeal via ask@mq.edu.au.

http://students.mq.edu.au/support/complaints_appeals/appeals/

Recommended Readings per Week

Weeks 1-6

Fettiplace R. Hackney CM. (2006). The sensory and motor roles of auditory hair cells. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 7; 19-29.

Londsbury BL. Martin GK. (1990). The clinical utility of distortion-product otoacoustic emissions. Ear & Hearing, 11; 144-154.

Kemp DT. (2002). Otoacoustics emissions, their origin in cochlear function, and use. British Medical Bulletin, 63 (1): 223-241.

7 Perception of segments

Liberman, A.M., Harris, K. S., Hoffman, H.S. & Griffith, B. C. (1957). The discrimination of speech sounds within and across phoneme boundaries. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 54, 358-368. 

Miyawaki, K., Jenkins, J. J., Strange, W., Liberman, A. M., Verbrugge, R., & Fujimura, O. (1975). An effect of linguistic experience: The discrimination of [r] and [l] by native speakers of Japanese and English. Perception & Psychophysics, 18(5), 331-340.

Benders, T., Escudero, P., & Sjerps, M. J. (2012). The interrelation between acoustic context effects and available response categories in speech sound categorization a. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 131(4), 3079-3087.

Ganong, W.F. (1980). Phonetic categorization in auditory word perception. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 6, 110-125. 12.

8 Perception of prosody

Dupoux, E., Pallier, C., Sebastian, N., & Mehler, J. (1997). A destressing" deafness" in French?. Journal of Memory and Language, 36, 406-421.

Cooper, N., Cutler, A., & Wales, R. (2002). Constraints of lexical stress on lexical access in English: Evidence from native and non-native listeners. Language and speech, 45(3), 207-228.

Akker, E., & Cutler, A. (2003). Prosodic cues to semantic structure in native and nonnative listening. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 6(02), 81-96.

Grosjean, F. (1996). Using prosody to predict the end of sentences in English and French: Normal and brain-damaged subjects. Language and cognitive processes, 11(1-2), 107-134.

9 L2 development of speech perception

Escudero, P., Benders, T., & Lipski, S. C. (2009). Native, non-native and L2 perceptual cue weighting for Dutch vowels: The case of Dutch, German, and Spanish listeners. Journal of Phonetics, 37(4), 452-465.

Cooper, N., Cutler, A., & Wales, R. (2002). Constraints of lexical stress on lexical access in English: Evidence from native and non-native listeners. Language and speech, 45(3), 207-228.

Weiss, D., & Dempsey, J. J. (2008). Performance of bilingual speakers on the English and Spanish versions of the Hearing in Noise Test (HINT). Journal of the American Academy of Audiology, 19(1), 5-17.

10 Speech perception by hearing-impaired listeners

Moberly, A. C., Lowenstein, J. H., Tarr, E., Caldwell-Tarr, A., Welling, D. B., Shahin, A. J., & Nittrouer, S. (2014). Do adults with cochlear implants rely on different acoustic cues for phoneme perception than adults with normal hearing?. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 57(2), 566-582.

Straatman, L. V., Rietveld, A. C. M., Beijen, J., Mylanus, E. A. M., & Mens, L. H. M. (2010). Advantage of bimodal fitting in prosody perception for children using a cochlear implant and a hearing aid. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 128(4), 1884-1895.

Holt, C. M., Demuth, K., & Yuen, I. (2016). The Use of Prosodic Cues in Sentence Processing by Prelingually Deaf Users of Cochlear Implants. Ear and hearing, 37(4), e256-e262.

11 (early) L1 development of speech perception

Werker, J. F. and Tees, R. C. (1984) Cross-language speech perception: Evidence from perceptual reorganization during the first year of life. Infant Behavior and Development, 7, 49-63.

Narayan, C. R., Werker, J. F., & Beddor, P. S. (2010). The interaction between acoustic salience and language experience in developmental speech perception: Evidence from nasal place discrimination. Developmental science, 13(3), 407-420.

Altvater-Mackensen, N., & Fikkert, P. (2010). The acquisition of the stop-fricative contrast in perception and production. Lingua, 120(8), 1898-1909.

Jusczyk, P. W., Houston, D. M., & Newsome, M. (1999). The beginnings of word segmentation in English-learning infants. Cognitive psychology, 39(3), 159-207.

Lammertink, I., Casillas, M., Benders, T., Post, B., & Fikkert, P. (2015). Dutch and English toddlers’ use of linguistic cues in predicting upcoming turn transitions. Front. Psychol, 6(495), 10-3389.

12 Psychoacoustics

None

1. The Ear: An overview

2. Cochlear anatomy and physiology (mechanoelectrical transduction)

3. Cochlear non linearity

4. Auditory nerve - anatomy and physiology

5. Central Auditory nervous pathway

6. Auditory cortex, Localization and acoustic reflex pathway

7. Perception of Segments

8. Perception of Prosody

9. L2 Development of Speech Perception

10. Speech perception by hearing-impaired listeners

11. Early (L1) acquisition of speech perception

12. Psychoacoustics

13. Closing remarks

PRACS WILL BE HELD IN:-

• Weeks 1 - 2    DPOA
• Weeks 7 - 8    Categorical Perception
• Week 10 - 11  Experiment Proposal