When selective adaptation and contrast effects are distinct: a reply to Diehl, Kluender, and Parker.
Two alternative conceptualizations of selective adaptation with speech have recently received attention. The adaptation level theory (AL) outlined by Diehl (1981) and a two-stage model outlined by Sawusch and Jusczyk (1981) can both account for much of the adaptation and paired-comparison data. Recently, Diehl, Kluender, and Parker (1985) proposed that all adaptation and contrast data can be accounted for by AL theory. They reported the results of a study that showed evidence of streaming in selective adaptation and claimed that their results provide a counterdemonstration to recent studies that have argued against the AL approach. In the present article, an outline of how the Diehl et al. results can be accounted for by both the two-stage model and AL theory is presented. In addition, a new set of results comparing adaptation and paired-comparison procedures is presented. These results are precisely as predicted by the two-stage model, but they can not be handled by AL theory.
Sawusch
J R
JR
Mullennix
J W
JW
D000222:Adaptation, Physiological; D006801:Humans; D008962:Models, Theoretical; D010700:Phonetics; D013061:Speech Acoustics; D013067:Speech Perception / Q000502:physiology*