Effects of age and divided attention on listeners' comprehension of synthesized speech

References

• Boning, R. A. (1990a). Getting the facts: Book G. (5th ed.). New York: Bernell Loft.
   Google Scholar
• Boning, R. A. (1990b). Getting the facts: Book H. (3rd ed.). New York: Bernell Loft.
   Google Scholar
• Carney, E. (1999). Calcrms [Computer software]. Minneapolis: Author.
   Google Scholar
• Cohen, J., MacWhinney, B., Flatt, M., & Provost, J. (1994). PsyScope (Version 1.0) [Computer software]. Pittsburgh: Carnegie Mellon University.
   Google Scholar
• Craik, F. I. M. (1977). Age differences in human memory. In J. E. Birren & K. W. Schaie (Eds.), Handbook of the psychology of aging (pp. 384–421). New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.
   Google Scholar
• Crossley, M., & Hiscock, M. (1992). Age-related differences in concurrent-task performance of normal adults: Evidence for a decline in processing resources. Psychology and Aging, 7, 499–506.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Drager, K. D. R. (1999). Intelligibility and comprehensibility of syn-thetic speech: Effects of age, linguistic context, and attention. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Minnesota.
   Google Scholar
• Duffy, S. A. & Pisoni, D. B. (1992). Comprehension of synthetic speech produced by rule: A review and theoretical interpreta-tion. Language and Speech, 35,351–389.
   Google Scholar
• Folstein, M. F., Folstein, S. E., & McHugh, P. R. (1975). Mini-men-tal state: A practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinician. Journal of Psychiatric Research, 12, 189–198.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Higginbotham, D. J., Drazek, A. L., Kowarsky, K., Scally, C., & Segal, E. (1994). Discourse comprehension of synthetic speech delivered at normal and slow presentation rates. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 10, 191–202.
   Google Scholar
• Higginbotham, D. J., Scally, C. A., Lundy, D. C., & Kowarsky, D. (1995). Discourse comprehension of synthetic speech across three augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) out-put methods. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 38, 889–901.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Humes, L. E., Nelson, K. J., & Pisoni, D. B. (1991). Recognition of synthetic speech by hearing-impaired elderly listeners. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 34, 1180–1184.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Humes, L. E., Nelson, K. J., Pisoni, D. B., & Lively, S. E. (1993). Effects of age on serial recall of natural and synthetic speech. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 36, 634–639.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Jenkins, J. J., & Franklin, L. D. (1982). Recall of passages of syn-thetic speech. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 20, 203–206.
   Google Scholar
• Kangas, K. A., & Allen, G. D. (1990). Intelligibility of synthetic speech for normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners. Jour-nal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 55,751–755.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klatt, D. H. (1987). Review of text-to-speech conversion for Eng-lish. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 82, 737–793.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kramer, A., & Spinks, J. (1991). Capacity views of human infor-mation processing. In J. R. Jennings (Ed.), Handbook of cog-nitive psychophysiology: Central and autonomic nervous system approaches (pp. 179–249). Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons.
   Google Scholar
• Marics, M. A., & Williges, B. H. (1988). The intelligibility of syn-thesized speech in data inquiry systems. Human Factors, 30, 719–732.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McDowd, J. M., & Craik, F. I. M. (1988). Effects of aging and task difficulty on divided attention performance. Journal of Experi-mental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 14, 267–280.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mirenda, P., & Beukelman, D. R. (1987). A comparison of speech synthesis intelligibility with listeners from three age groups. Aug-mentative and Alternative Communication, 3,120–128.
   Google Scholar
• Moray, N. (1967). Where is capacity limited? A survey and a model. Acta Psychologica, 27, 84–92.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morrell, C. H., Gordon-Salant, S., Pearson, J. D., Brant, L. J., & Fozard, J. L. (1996). Age- and gender-specific reference ranges for hearing level and longitudinal changes in hearing level. Jour-nal of the Acoustical Society of America, 100, 1949–1967.
   Google Scholar
• Perfect, T. J., & Rabbitt, P. M. A. (1993). Age and the divided attention costs of category exemplar generation. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 11, 131–142.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pisoni, D. B., Manous, L. M., & Dedina, M. J. (1987). Comprehen-sion of natural and synthetic speech: II. Effects of predictability on the verification of sentences controlled for intelligibility. Com-puter Speech and Language, 2, 303–320.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ponds, R., Brouwer, W. H., & van Wolffelaar, P. C. (1988). Age dif-ferences in divided attention in a simulated driving task. Jour-nal of Gerontology, 43,151–156.
   Google Scholar
• Ralston, J. V., Pisoni, D. B., Lively, S. E., Greene, B. G., & Mul-lennix, J. W. (1991). Comprehension of synthetic speech pro-duced by rule: Word monitoring and sentence-by-sentence lis-tening times. Human Factors, 33,471–491.
   Google Scholar
• Salthouse, T. A., Davenport Rogan, J. D., & Prill, K. A. (1984). Divi-sion of attention: Age differences on a visually presented mem-ory task. Memory and Cognition, 12, 613–620.
   Google Scholar
• Schwab, E. C., Nusbaum, H. C., & Pisoni, D. B. (1985). Some effects of training on the perception of synthetic speech. Human Factors, 27, 395–408.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sohlberg, M. M., & Mateer, C. A. (1986). Attention process train-ing (APT). Puyallup, WA: Association for Neuropsychological Research and Development.
   Google Scholar
• Somberg, B. L., & Salthouse, T. A. (1982). Divided attention abil-ities in young and old adults. Journal of Experimental Psychol-ogy: Human Perception and Performance, 8, 651–663.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sutton, B., King, J., Hux, K., & Beukelman, D. R. (1995). Younger and older adults' rate performance when listening to synthetic speech. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 11, 147–153.
   Google Scholar
• Wright, R. E. (1981). Aging, divided attention, and processing capacity. Journal of Gerontology, 36, 605–614.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar