Amichetti, N. M., Stanley, R. S., White, A. G., & Wingfield, A. (2013). Monitoring the capacity of working memory: Executive control and effects of listening effort. Memory and Cognition, 41(6), 839–849.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Baddeley, A. D. (1999). Essentials of human memory. New York, NY: Psychology Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bates, D., Mächler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S. (2015). Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software, 67(1), 1–48.Google Scholar

Bent, T., Baese-Berk, M., Borrie, S. A., & McKee, M. (2016). Individual differences in the perception of regional, nonnative, and disordered speech varieties. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 140(5), 3775–3786.Google Scholar

Boersma, P., & Weenink, D. (2013). Praat: doing phonetics by computer [Computer software]. Retrieved from www.praat.org/Google Scholar

Bosker, H. R., Quené, H., Sanders, T., & Jong, N. H. (2014). The perception of fluency in native and nonnative speech. Language Learning, 64(3), 579–614.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Davidson, L. (2011). Phonetic, phonemic, and phonological factors in cross-language discrimination of phonotactic contrasts. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 37(1), 270–282.Google Scholar

Deese, J. (1980). Pauses, prosody, and the demands of production in language. In Dechert, H. W. & Raupach, M (Eds.), Temporal variables in speech: Studies in honour of Frieda Goldman-Eisler (pp. 69–84). The Hague, Netherlands: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar

Derwing, T., & Munro, M. (1997). Accent, intelligibility, and comprehensibility: Evidence from four L1s. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19, 1–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Derwing, T., & Munro, M. (2005). Second language accent and pronunciation teaching: A research-based approach. TESOL Quarterly, 39, 379–397.Google Scholar

Deschamps, A. (1980). The syntactical distribution of pauses in English spoken as a second language by French students. In Dechert, H & Raupach, M (Eds.), Temporal variables in speech: Studies in honour of Frieda Goldman-Eisler (pp. 255–262). The Hague, Netherlands: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Edwards, B. (2016). A model of auditory-cognitive processing and relevance to clinical applicability. Ear and Hearing, 37, 85S–91S.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Floccia, C., Butler, J., Goslin, J., & Ellis, L. (2009). Regional and foreign accent processing in English: Can listeners adapt? Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 38, 379–412.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Freed, B. (1995). What makes us think that students who study abroad become fluent? In Freed, B (Ed.), Second language acquisition in a study abroad context (pp. 123–148). Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Garcia Lecumberri, M. L., Cooke, M., & Cutler, A. (2010). Non-native speech perception in adverse conditions: A review. Speech Communication, 52(11), 864–886.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Gevins, A., & Cutillo, B. (1993). Neuroelectric evidence for distributed processing in human working memory. Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology, 87, 128–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ginther, A., Dimova, S., & Yang, R. (2010). Conceptual and empirical relationships between temporal measurements of fluency. Language Testing, 27, 379–399.Google Scholar

Goldman-Eisler, F. (1968). Psycholinguistics: Experiments in spontaneous speech. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar

Haatveit, B. C., Sundet, K., Hugdahl, K., Ueland, T., Melle, I., & Andreassen, O. A. (2010). The validity of d prime as a working memory index: results from the “Bergen n-back task.” Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 32(8), 871–880.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Hart, S., & Staveland, L. (1988). Development of NASA-TLX (Task Load Index): Results of empirical and theoretical research. In Hancock, P & Meshkati, N (Eds.), Human mental workload (pp. 139–183). Amsterdam, Netherlands: North-Holland Press.Google Scholar

Heald, S., & Nusbaum, H. C. (2014). Speech perception as an active cognitive process. Frontiers in Systems Neuroscience, 8, 35.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Johnson, J., Xu, J., Cox, R., & Pendergraft, P. (2015). A comparison of two methods for measuring listening effort as part of an audiologic test battery. American Journal of Audiology, 24(3), 419–431.Google Scholar

Just, M., & Carpenter, P. (1992). A capacity theory of comprehension: Individual differences in working memory. Psychological Review, 99, 122–149.Google Scholar

Kuznetsova, A., Brockhoff, P. B., & Christensen, R. H. B. (2017). lmerTest package: Tests in linear mixed effects models. Journal of Statistical Software, 82(13), 1–26.Google Scholar

Le, S., Josse, J., & Husson, F. (2008). FactoMineR: An R package for multivariate analysis. Journal of Statistical Software, 25(1), 1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Lennon, P. (1984). Retelling a story in English. In Dechert, H, Möhle, D, & Raupach, M (Eds.), Second language productions (pp. 50–68). Tübingen, Germany: Gunter Narr.Google Scholar

Lennon, P. (1990). The advanced learner at large in the L2 community: Developments in the spoken performance. Interaction Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 28, 309–321.Google Scholar

Lenth, R., Singmann, H., Love, J., Buerkner, P., & Herve, M. (2018). emmeans: Estimated Marginal Means, aka Least-Squares Means (R package Version 1.2.3). Retrieved from https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=emmeansGoogle Scholar

Lunner, T. (2010). Designing HA signal processing to reduce demand on working memory. The Hearing Journal, 63, 29–31.Google Scholar

Mackersie, C., MacPhee, I. X., & Heldt, E. W. (2015). Effects of hearing loss on heart rate variability and skin conductance measured during sentence recognition in noise. Ear and Hearing, 36(1), 145–154.Google Scholar

Macmillan, N., & Creelman, C. (1990). Response bias: Characteristics of detection theory, threshold theory, and nonparametric indexes. Psychological Bulletin, 107, 401–413.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

McLaughlin, D. J., Baese-Berk, M. M., Bent, T., Borrie, S. A., & Van Engen, K. J. (2018). Coping with adversity: Individual differences in the perception of noisy and accented speech. Attention, Perception, and Psychophysics, 80(6), 1559–1570.Google Scholar

Munro, M., & Derwing, T. (1995). Processing time, accent, and comprehensibility in the perception of foreign-accented speech. Language and Speech, 38, 289–306.Google Scholar

Munro, M., & Derwing, T. (1998). The effects of speaking rate on listener evaluation of native and foreign-accented speech. Language Learning, 48, 159–182.Google Scholar

Owen, A., McMillan, K., Laird, A., & Bullmore, E. (2005). N-back working memory paradigm: A meta-analysis of normative functional neuroimaging studies. Human Brain Mapping, 25, 46–59.Google Scholar

Peelle, J. E. (2017). Listening effort: How the cognitive consequences of acoustic challenge are reflected in brain and behavior. Ear and Hearing, 39(2), 204–214.Google Scholar

Pichora-Fuller, M. K. (2006). Perceptual effort and apparent cognitive decline: Implications for audiologic rehabilitation. Seminars in Hearing, 27(4), 284–293.Google Scholar

Pichora-Fuller, M. K., Kramer, S. E., Eckert, M. A., Edwards, B., Hornsby, W. Y., Humes, L. E., … Wingfield, A. (2016). Hearing impairment and cognitive energy: The Framework for Understanding Effortful Listening (FUEL). Ear and Hearing, 37, 5S–27S.Google Scholar

Raupach, M. (1980). Temporal variables in first and second language speech production. In Dechert, H & Raupach, M (Eds.), Temporal variables in speech Studies in honour of Frieda Goldman-Eisler (pp. 263–271). The Hague, Netherlands: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar

Raupach, M. (1984). Formulae in second language speech production. In Dechert, H & Möhle, D & Raupach, M (Eds.), Second language productions (pp. 114–137). Tübingen, Germany: Gunter Narr.Google Scholar

R Core Team. (2018). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing.Google Scholar

Riazantseva, A. (2001). Second language proficiency and pausing: A study of Russian speakers of English. SSLA, 23, 497–526.Google Scholar

Riggenbach, H. (1991). Towards an understanding of fluency: A microanalysis of nonnative speaker conversations. Discourse Analysis, 14, 423–443.Google Scholar

Rönnberg, J., Lunner, T., Zekveld, A., Sörqvist, P., Danielsson, H., Lyxell, B., … Rudner, M. (2013). The Ease of Language Understanding (ELU) model: Theoretical, empirical, and clinical advances. Frontiers in Systems Neuroscience, 7, 31.Google Scholar

Rudner, M., Lunner, T., Behren, T., Thoren, E. S., & Ronnberg, J. (2012). Working memory capacity may influence perceived effort during aided speech recognition in noise. Journal of the American Academy of Audiology, 23, 577–589.Google ScholarPubMed

Sajavaara, K. (1987). Second language speech production factors affecting fluency. In Dechert, H. W. & Raupach, M (Eds.), Psycholinguistic models of production (pp. 45–65). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar

Schmid, P., & Yeni-Komshian, G. (1999). The effects of speaker accent and target predictability on perception of mispronunciations. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 42, 56–64.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Schneider, W., Eschman, A., & Zuccolotto, A. (2002). E-Prime reference guide. Pittsburgh, PA: Psychology Software Tools.Google Scholar

Van Engen, K., & Peelle, J. (2014). Listening effort and accented speech. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 8, 1–4.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Wingfield, A. (2016). Evolution of models of working memory and cognitive resources. Ear and Hearing, 37, 35S–43S.Google Scholar

Wood, D. (2001). In search of fluency: What is it and how can we teaching it? Canadian Modern Language Review, 57, 571–589.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Zekveld, A., Kramer, S., & Festen, J. (2011). Cognitive load during speech perception in noise: The influence of age, hearing loss, and cognition on the pupil response. Ear and Hearing, 32, 498–510.Google Scholar

Andringa, S., Olsthoorn, N., van Beuningen, C., Schoonen, R., & Hulstijn, J. (2012). Determinants of success in native and non-native listening comprehension: An individual differences approach. Language Learning, 62(2), 49–78.Google Scholar

Baddeley, A. (2012). Working memory: Theories, models, and controversies. Annual Review of Psychology, 63, 1–29.Google Scholar

Baddeley, A., Allen, R. J., & Hitch, G. J. (2010). Investigating the episodic buffer. Phychologica Belgica, 50(3&4), 223–243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Baddeley, A., & Hitch, G. (1974). Working memory. In Bower, G. A. (Ed.), Recent advances in learning and motivation (Vol. 8, pp. 47–90). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar

Brooks, P. J., & Kempe, V. (2013). Individual differences in adult foreign language learning: The mediating effect of metalinguistic awareness. Memory and Cognition, 41(2), 281–296.Google Scholar

Burnham, D., & Mattock, K. (2007). The perception of tones and phones. In Bohn, O.-S. & Munro, M. J. (Eds.), Language experience in second language speech learning: In honor of James Emil Flege (pp. 259–280). Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Carroll, J. B., & Sapon, S. S. (1959). Modern language aptitude test. San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corporation.Google Scholar

Cedrus Corporation. (2008). SuperLab 4.0 [Computer software]. Phoenix, AZ: Author. Retrieved from www.superlab.com/Google Scholar

Cooper, A., & Wang, Y. (2012). The influence of linguistic and musical experience on Cantonese word learning. The Journal of Acoustical Society of America, 131(6), 4756–4769.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

DeKeyser, R. (2012). Interactions between individual differences, treatments, and structures in SLA. Language Learning, 62(2), 189–200.Google Scholar

Dörnyei, Z. (2005). The psychology of the language learner: Individual differences in second language acquisition. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar

Ellis, R. (2008). Individual differences and second language learning. In The study of second language acquisition (2nd ed., pp. 643–724). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Gathercole, S. E., & Baddeley, A. D. (1993). Working memory and language. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar

Goldinger, S. D. (1996). Words and voices: Episodic traces in spoken word identification and recognition memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 22(5), 1166–1183.Google Scholar

Golestani, N., & Zatorre, R. J. (2009). Individual differences in the acquisition of second language phonology. Brain and Language, 109(2–3), 55–67.Google Scholar

Goss, S. J., & Tamaoka, K. (2019). Lexical accent perception in highly-proficient L2 Japanese learners: The roles of language-specific experience and domain-general resources. Second Language Research, 35(3), 351–376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Guion, S. G., & Pederson, E. (2007). Investigating the role of attention in phonetic learning. In Bohn, O.-S. & Munro, M (Eds.), Language experience in second language speech learning (pp. 57–77). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Hanulíková, A., Dediu, D., Fang, Z., Bašnaková, J., & Huettig, F. (2012). Individual differences in the acquisition of a complex L2 phonology: A training study. Language Learning, 62(s2), 79–109.Google Scholar

Hao, Y.-C. (2018). Second language perception of Mandarin vowels and tones. Language and Speech, 61(1), 135–152.Google Scholar

Heaton, R. K., Akshoomoff, N., Tulsky, D., Mungas, D., Weintraub, S., Dikmen, S., … Gershon, R. (2014). Reliability and validity of Composite Sores from the NIH Toolbox Cognition Battery in adults. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, 20(6), 588–598.Google Scholar

Hyman, L. M. (2011). Tone: Is it different? In Goldsmith, J, Riggle, J, & Yu, A (Eds.), The handbook of phonological theory (2nd ed., pp. 197–239). Malden, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar

IBM Corp. (2017). IBM SPSS Statistics for Macintosh (Version 25.0). Armonk, NY: Author.Google Scholar

Kidd, E., Donnelly, S., & Christiansen, M. H. (2017). Individual differences in language acquisition and processing. TRENDS in Cognitive Sciences, 22(2), 154–169.Google Scholar

Kirby, J. P. (2011). Illustration of the IPA: Vietnamese (Hanoi Vietnamese). Journal of the International Phonetic Association, 41(3), 381–392.Google Scholar

Kyllonen, P., & Christal, R. (1990). Reasoning ability is (little more than) working memory capacity?! Intelligence, 14, 389–433.Google Scholar

Macmillan, N. A., & Creelman, C. D. (2005). Detection theory: A user’s guide (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar

Maddox, W. T., & Chandrasekaran, B. (2014). Tests of a dual-system model of speech category learning. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 17(4), 709–728.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Martin, K. I., & Ellis, N. C. (2012). The roles of phonological short-term memory and working memory in L2 grammar and vocabulary learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 34(3), 379–413.Google Scholar

Morgan-Short, K., Faretta-Stutenberg, M., Brill-Schuetz, K. A., Carpenter, H., & Wong, P. C. M. (2014). Declarative and procedural memory as individual differences in second language acquisition. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 17(1), 56–72.Google Scholar

Necka, E., Machera, M., & Miklas, E. (1992). Incidental learning, intelligence, and verbal ability. Learning and Instruction, 2(2), 141–153.Google Scholar

National Institute of Health & Northwestern University. (2006–2012). NIH Toolbox: Cognition. Retrieved from www.assessmentcenter.net/Google Scholar

Pajak, B., Creel, S. C., & Levy, R. (2016). Difficulty in learning similar-sounding words: A developmental stage or a general property of learning? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 49(2), 1377–1399.Google Scholar

Pallier, C., Bosch, L., & Sebastián-Gallés, N. (1997). A limit on behavioral plasticity in speech perception. Cognition, 64(3), B9–B17. Perrachione, T. K., Lee, J., Ha, L. Y. Y, & Wong, P. C. M. (2011). Learning a novel phonological contrast depends on interactions between individual differences and training paradigm design. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 130(1), 461–472.Google Scholar

Roberts, L. (2012). Individual differences in second language sentence processing. Language Learning, 62(2), 172–188.Google Scholar

Robinson, P. (1997). Individual differences and the fundamental similarity of implicit and explicit adult second language learning. Language Learning, 47(1), 45–99.Google Scholar

Robinson, P. (2001). Individual differences, cognitive abilities, aptitude complexes and learning conditions in second language acquisition. Second Language Research, 17(4), 368–392.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Serafini, E. J., & Sanz, C. (2016). Evidence for the decreasing impact of cognitive ability on second language development as proficiency increases. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 38(4), 607–646.Google Scholar

Shport, I. A. (2008). Acquisition of Japanese pitch accent by American learners. In Heinrich, P & Sugita, Y (Eds.), Japanese as foreign language in the age of globalization (Vol. 43, pp. 165–187). Munich, Germany: Iudicium.Google Scholar

Shport, I. A. (2015). Perception of acoustic cues to Tokyo Japanese pitch-accent contrasts in native Japanese and naïve English listeners. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 138(1), 307–318.Google Scholar

Shport, I. (2016). Perceptual assimilation and discrimination of falling, level, and rising lexical tones by native English speakers. In Barnes, J, Brugos, A, Shattuck-Hufnagel, S, & Veilleux, N (Eds.), Speech Prosody 2016 (pp. 533–537). Boston: Boston University.Google Scholar

Shport, I. A. (2019). Perception of Vietnamese back vowels contrasting in rounding by English listeners. Journal of Phonetics, 73, 8–23.Google Scholar

Silbert, N., Smith, B. K., Jackson, S. R., Campbell, S. G., Hughes, M. M., & Tare, M. (2015). Non-native phonemic discrimination, phonological short working memory, and word learning. Journal of Phonetics, 50, 99–119.Google Scholar

Skehan, P. (1991). Individual differences in second language learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 13(2), 275–298.Google Scholar

Slotkin, J., et al. (2012). NIH Toolbox: Scoring and interpretation manual. National Institute of Health & Northwestern University. Retrieved from www.healthmeasures.net/images/nihtoolbox/Training-Admin-Scoring_Manuals/NIH_Toolbox_Scoring_and_Interpretation_Manual_9-27-12.pdfGoogle Scholar

So, C. K., & Best, C. T. (2010). Cross-language perception of non-native tonal contrasts: Effects of native phonological and phonetic influences. Language and Speech, 53(2), 273–293.Google Scholar

Tulving, E. (1972). Episodic and semantic memory. In Tulving, E & Donaldson, W (Eds.), Organization of memory (pp. 381–403). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar

Ullman, M. T. (2001). The declarative/procedural model of lexicon and grammar. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 30(1), 37–69.Google Scholar

Wechsler, D. (2008). Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale–Fourth Edition (WAIS-IV). San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corporation.Google Scholar

Weintraub, S., et al. (2013). Cognition assessment using the NIH Toolbox. Neurology, 80, S54–S64.Google Scholar

Wong, P. C. M., & Perrachione, T. K. (2007). Learning pitch patterns in lexical identification by native English-speaking adults. Applied Psycholinguistics, 28(4), 565–585.Google Scholar

Best, C. T. (1995). A direct realist perspective on cross-language speech perception. In Strange, W (Ed.), Speech perception and linguistic experience: Theoretical and methodological issues in cross-language speech research (pp. 167–200). Timonium, MD: York Press.Google Scholar

Best, C. T., & Tyler, M. D. (2007). Nonnative and second-language speech perception: Commonalities and complementarities. In Munro, M. J. & Bohn, O. S. (Eds.), Second language speech learning: The role of language experience in speech perception and production (pp. 13–34). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Boersma, P. (2001). Praat, a system for doing phonetics by computer. Glot International, 5(9/10), 341–345.Google Scholar

Bradlow, A. R., Akahane-Yamada, R., Pisoni, D. B., & Tohkura, Y. (1999). Training Japanese listeners to identify English /r/ and /l/: Long-term retention of learning in perception and production. Perception and Psychophysics, 61, 977–985.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bradlow, A., Pisoni, D., Akahane-Yamada, R., & Tohkura, Y. (1997). Training Japanese listeners to identify English /r/ and /l/: Some effects of perceptual learning on speech production. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 101, 2299–2310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Callan, D. E., Tajima, K., Callan, A. M., Kubo, R., Masaki, S., & Akahane- Yamada, R. (2003). Learning-induced neural plasticity associated with improved identification performance after training of a difficult second-language phonetic contrast. NeuroImage, 19, 113–124.Google Scholar

Clopper, C. G., Pisoni, D. B., & de Jong, K. (2005). Acoustic characteristics of the vowel systems of six regional varieties of American English. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 118, 1661–1676.Google Scholar

Cooper, W. E., Blumstein, S. E., & Nigro, G. (1975). Articulatory effects on speech perception: A preliminary report. Journal of Phonetics, 3, 87–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Cooper, W. E., & Lauritsen, M. R. (1974). Feature processing in the perception and production of speech. Nature, 252, 121–123.Google Scholar

D’Ausilio, A., Pulvermuller, F., Salmas, P., Bufalari, I., Begliomini, C., & Fadiga, L. (2009). The motor somatotopy of speech perception. Current Biology, 19, 381–385.Google Scholar

Davies, M. (2008). The corpus of contemporary American English: 450 million words, 1990–present. Retrieved from http://corpus.byu.edu/coca/Google Scholar

Elman, J. L. (1981). Effects of frequency-shifted feedback on the pitch of vocal productions. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 70, 45–50.Google Scholar

Fadiga, L., Craighero, L., Buccino, G., & Rizzollati, G. (2002). Speech listening specifically modulates the excitability of tongue muscles: A TMS study. European Journal of Neuroscience, 15, 399–402.Google Scholar

Flege, J. (1987). The production of “new” and “similar” phones in a foreign language: Evidence for the effect of equivalence classification. Journal of Phonetics, 15, 47–65.Google Scholar

Flege, J. E. (1991). Age of learning affects the authenticity of voice-onset time (VOT) in stop consonants produced in a second language. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 89, 395–411.Google Scholar

Flege, J. E. (1993). Production and perception of a novel, second-language phonetic contrast. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 93, 1589–1608.Google Scholar

Flege, J. E. (1995). Second-language speech learning: Theory, findings, and problems. In Strange, W (Ed.), Speech perception and linguistic experience (pp. 233–277). Timonium, MD: York Press.Google Scholar

Flege, J. E. (1997). English vowel production by Dutch talkers: More evidence for the “new” vs “similar” distinction. In James, A & Leather, J (Eds.), Second-language speech: Structure and process (pp. 11–52). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar

Flege, J. E. (1999). The relation between L2 production and perception. In Ohala, J, Hasegawa, Y, Ohala, M, Granveille, D, & Bailey, A (Eds.), Proceedings of the XIVth International Congress of Phonetics Sciences (pp. 1273–1276). Berkeley: Department of Linguistics, University of California.Google Scholar

Flege, J. E. (2003). Assessing constraints on second-language segmental production and perception. In Schniller, N & Meyer, A (Eds.), Phonetics and phonology in language comprehension and production: Differences and similarities (pp. 319–355). New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar

Flege, J. E. (2007). Language contact in bilingualism: Phonetic system interactions. In Cole, J & Hualde, J. I. (Eds.), Laboratory phonology 9 (pp. 353–382). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar

Flege, J. E., Bohn, O., & Jang, S. (1997). Effects of experience on non-native speakers’ production and perception of English vowels. Journal of Phonetics, 25, 437–470.Google Scholar

Flege, J. E., & Eefting, W. (1987). Production and perception of English stops by native Spanish speakers. Journal of Phonetics, 15, 67–83.Google Scholar

Fowler, C. A. (1986). An event approach to the study of speech perception from a direct-realist perspective. Journal of Phonetics, 14, 3–28.Google Scholar

Hillenbrand, J. M., & Clark, M. J. (2000). Some effects of duration on vowel recognition. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 108, 3013–3022.Google Scholar

Hillenbrand, J., Getty, L. A., Clark, M. J., & Wheeler, K. (1995). Acoustic characteristics of American English vowels. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 97, 3099–3111.Google Scholar

Hirata, Y., & Whiton, J. (2005). Effects of speaking rate on the single/geminate stop distinction in Japanese. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 118, 1647–1660.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Houde, J. F., & Jordan, M. I. (1998). Sensorimotor adaptation in speech production. Science, 279, 1213–1216.Google Scholar

Jackson, A., & Morton, J. (1984). Facilitation of auditory word recognition. Memory and Cognition, 12, 568–574.Google Scholar

Jones, J. A., & Munhall, K. G. (2005). Remapping auditory-motor representations in voice production. Current Biology, 15, 1768–1772.Google Scholar

Kawahara, H. (1998). Hearing voice: Transformed auditory feedback effects on voice pitch control. In Proceedings of the International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence: Workshop on computational auditory scene analysis (pp. 335–349). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar

Kondaurova, M., & Francis, A. L. (2008). The relationship between native allophonic experience with vowel duration and perception of the English tense/lax vowel contrast by Spanish and Russian listeners. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 124, 3959–3971.Google Scholar

Kuhl, P. K., Conboy, B. T., Coffey-Corina, S., Padden, D., Rivera-Gaxiola, M., & Nelson, T. (2008). Phonetic learning as a pathway to language: new data and native language magnet theory expanded (NLM-e). Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B, 363, 979–1000.Google Scholar

Li, X., & Xu, B. (2005). Formant comparison between whispered and voiced vowels in Mandarin. ACTA Acustica United with Acustica, 91, 1079–1085.Google Scholar

Liberman, A. M., & Mattingly, I. G. (1985). The motor theory of speech perception revised. Cognition, 21, 1–36.Google Scholar

Meister, I., Wilson, S. M., Deblieck, C., Wu, A. D., & Iacoboni, M. (2007). The essential role of premotor cortex in speech perception. Current Biology, 17, 1692–1696.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Moyer, A. (1999). Ultimate attainment in L2 phonology. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 21, 81–108.Google Scholar

Nearey, T. M., & Assmann, P. (1986). Modeling the role of vowel inherent spectral change in vowel identification. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 80, 1297–1308.Google Scholar

Nielsen, K. Y. (2007). The interaction between spontaneous imitation and linguistic knowledge. University of California Working Papers in Phonetics, 105, 125–137.Google Scholar

Ojanen, V., Möttönen, R., Pekkola, J., Jääskeläinen, I. P., Joensuu, R., Autti, T., & Sams, M. (2005). Processing of audiovisual speech in Broca’s area. Neuroimage, 25, 333–338.Google Scholar

Pilotti, M., Bergman, E. T., Gallo, D. A., Sommers, M., & Roediger, H. L., III. (2000). Direct comparison of auditory implicit memory tests. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 7, 347–353.Google Scholar

Porter, R. J., & Castellanos, F. X. (1980). Speech-production measures of speech perception: Rapid shadowing of VCV syllables. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 67, 1349–1356.Google Scholar

Porter, R. J., & Lubker, J. F. (1980). Rapid reproduction of vowel-vowel sequences: Evidence for a fast and direct acoustic-motoric linkage in speech. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 23, 593–602.Google Scholar

Purcell, D. W., & Munhall, K. G. (2006a). Adaptive control of vowel formant frequency: Evidence from real-time formant manipulation. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 120, 966–977.Google Scholar

Purcell, D. W., & Munhall, K. G. (2006b). Compensation following real-time manipulation of formants in isolated vowels. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 119, 2288–2297.Google Scholar

Rochet, B. L. (1995). Perception and production of second-language speech sounds by adults. In Strange, W (Ed.), Speech perception and linguistic experience (pp. 379–410). Timonium, MD: York Press.Google Scholar

Roy, A. C., Craighero, L., Fabbri-Destro, M., & Fadiga, L. (2008). Phonological and lexical motor facilitation during speech listening: A transcranial magnetic stimulation study. Journal of Physiology–Paris, 102, 101–105.Google Scholar

Schneider, E. W. (2006). English in North America. In Kachru, B. B., Kachru, Y, & Nelson, C. L. (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of world Englishes. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar

Schneiderman, E., Bourdages, J., & Champagne, C. (1988). Second-language accent: The relationship between discrimination and perception in acquisition. Language Learning, 38, 1–19.Google Scholar

Shiller, D. M., Sato, M., Gracco, V. L., & Baum, S. R. (2009). Perceptual recalibration of speech sounds following speech motor learning. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 125, 1103.Google Scholar

Skipper, J. I., van Wassenhove, V., Nusbaum, H. C., & Small, S. L. (2007). Hearing lips and seeing voices: How cortical areas supporting speech production mediate audiovisual speech perception. Cerebral Cortex, 17, 2387–2399.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Spencer, K. A., & Wiley, E. (2008). Response priming patterns differ with interstimulus interval duration. Clinical Linguistics and Phonetics, 22, 475–490.Google Scholar

Thomson, R. I. (2008). L2 English vowel learning by Mandarin speakers: Does perception precede production? Canadian Acoustics, 36, 134–135.Google Scholar

Thomson, R. I., Nearey, T. M., & Derwing, T. M. (2009). A modified statistical pattern recognition approach to measuring the crosslinguistic similarity of Mandarin and English vowels. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 126, 1447–1460.Google Scholar

Tilsen, S. (2009). Subphonemic and cross-phonemic priming in vowel shadowing: Evidence for the involvement of exemplars in production. Journal of Phonetics, 37, 276–296.Google Scholar

Traunmüller, H. (1990). Analytical expressions for the tonotopic sensory scale. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 88, 97–100.Google Scholar

Trofimovich, P. (2005). Spoken-word processing in native and second languages: An investigation of auditory word priming. Applied Psycholinguistics, 26, 479–504.Google Scholar

Trofimovich, P., & Gatbonton, E. (2006). Repetition and focus on form in processing L2 Spanish words: Implications for pronunciation instruction. Modern Language Journal, 90, 519–535.Google Scholar

Villacorta, V. M., Perkell, J. S., & Guenther, F. H. (2007). Sensorimotor adaptation to feedback perturbations of vowel acoustics and its relation to perception. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 122, 2306.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Wang, X. (1997). The acquisition of English vowels by Mandarin ESL learners: A study of production and perception. Unpublished PhD dissertation, Simon Fraser University.Google Scholar

Wang, X., & Munro, M. (2004). Computer-based training for learning English vowel contrasts. System, 32, 539–552.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Wang, Y., Jongman, A., & Sereno, J. A. (2003). Acoustic and perceptual evaluation of Mandarin tone productions before and after perceptual training. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 113, 1033–1044.Google Scholar

Wang, Y., Sereno, J. A., Jongman, A., & Hirsch, J. (2003). fMRI evidence for cortical modification during learning of mandarin lexical tone. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 15, 1019–1027.Google Scholar

Watkins, K., & Paus, T. (2004). Modulation of motor excitability during speech perception: The role of Broca’s area. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 16, 978–987.Google Scholar

Wilson, S. M., Saygin, A. P., Sereno, M. I., & Iacoboni, M. (2004). Listening to speech activates motor areas involved in speech production. Nature Neuroscience, 7, 701–702.Google Scholar

Aoyama, K., Flege, J. E., Guion, S. G., Akahane-Yamada, R., & Yamada, T. (2004). Perceived phonetic dissimilarity and L2 speech learning: The case of Japanese/r/and English /l/ and /r. Journal of Phonetics, 32, 233–250.Google Scholar

Aoyama, K., Guion, S. G., Flege, J. E., Yamada, T., & Akahane-Yamada, R. (2008). The first years in an L2-speaking environment: A comparison of Japanese children and adults learning American English. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 46, 61–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Barr, D., Levy, R., Scheepers, C., & Tily, H. (2013). Random effects structure for confirmatory hypothesis testing: keep it maximal. Journal of Memory and Language, 68, 255–278.Google Scholar

Bates, D., Maechler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S. (2015). lme4: Linear mixed-effects models using Eigen and S4 (R package Version 1.1-9). Retrieved from https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=lme4Google Scholar

Best, C., & McRoberts, G. (2003). Infant perception of nonnative contrasts that adults assimilate in different ways. Language and Speech, 46, 183–216.Google Scholar

Best, C., McRoberts, G., & Goodell, E. (2001). Discrimination of non-native consonant contrasts varying in perceptual assimilation to the listener’s native phonological system. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 109, 775–794.Google Scholar

Best, C., & Tyler, M. (2007). Nonnative and second-language speech perception: Commonalities and complementarities. In Munro, M. J. & Bohn, Ocke-Schwen (Eds.), Second language speech learning (pp. 13–34). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Boersma, P. (2001). Praat, a system for doing phonetics by computer. Glot International, 5, 341–345.Google Scholar

Flege, J. E. (1991). Perception and production: The relevance of phonetic input to L2 phonological learning. In Huebner, T & Ferguson, C (Eds.), Crosscurrents in second language acquisition and linguistic theories (pp. 249–289). Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Forrest, K., Weismer, G., Milenkovic, P., & Dougall, R. N. (1988). Statistical analysis of word-initial voiceless obstruents: Preliminary data. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 84, 115–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Funatsu, S. (1995). Cross language study of perception of dental fricatives in Japanese and Russian. In Elenius, K & Branderud, P (Eds.), Proceedings of the XIIIth International Congress of Phonetic Sciences (pp. 124–127).Google Scholar

Halle, M., & Stevens, K. N. (1997). The postalveolar fricatives of Polish. In Hajime, H, Kiritani, S, & Fujisaki, H (Eds.), Speech production and language: In honor of Osamu Fujimura (pp. 176–191). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar

Jaeger, T. F. (2008). Categorical data analysis: Away from ANOVAs (transformation or not) and towards logit mixed models. Journal of Memory and Language, 59(4), 434–446.Google Scholar

Jongman, A., Wayland, R., & Wong, S. (2000). Acoustic characteristics of English fricatives. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 108(3), 1252–1263.Google Scholar

Julien, H., & Munson, B. (2012). Modifying speech to children based on their perceived phonetic accuracy. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 55, 1836–1849.Google Scholar

Kang, S., Johnson, K., & Finley, G. (2016). Effects of native language on compensation for coarticulation. Speech Communication, 77, 84–100.Google Scholar

Kuznetsova, A., Brockhoff, P. B., & Christensen, R. H. B. (2013). lmerTest: Tests for random and fixed effects for linear mixed effect models (lmer objects of lme4 package) (R package Version 1.1-0). Retrieved from http://cran.rproject.org/web/packages/lmerTest/index.htmGoogle Scholar

Labov, W., Ash, S., & Boberg, C. (2008). The atlas of North American English: Phonetics, phonology and sound change. New York: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar

Li, F. (2012). Language-specific developmental differences in speech production: A cross-language acoustic study. Child Development, 83, 1303–1315.Google Scholar

Li, F., Edwards, J., & Beckman, M. E. (2009). Contrast and covert contrast: The phonetic development of voiceless sibilant fricatives in English and Japanese toddlers. Journal of Phonetics, 37, 111–124.Google Scholar

Li, F., & Munson, B. (2016). The development of voiceless sibilant fricatives in Putonghua-speaking children. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 59, 699–712.Google Scholar

Li, F., Munson, B., Edwards, J., Yoneyama, K., & Hall, K. (2011). Language specificity in the perception of voiceless sibilant fricatives in Japanese and English: Implications for cross-language differences in speech-sound development. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 129, 999–1011.Google Scholar

Maniwa, K., Jongman, A., & Wade, T. (2009). Acoustic characteristics of clearly spoken English fricatives. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 125, 3962–3973.Google Scholar

Mann, V. A., & Repp, B. H. (1981). Influence of preceding fricative on stop consonant perception. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 69, 548–558.Google Scholar

Munson, B. (2007). The acoustic correlates of perceived sexual orientation, perceived masculinity, and perceived femininity. Language and Speech, 50, 125–142.Google Scholar

Munson, B. (2011). The influence of actual and imputed talker gender on fricative perception, revisited. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 130, 2631–2634.Google Scholar

Munson, B., & Coyne, A. C. (2010). The influence of apparent vocal-tract size, contrast type, and implied sources of variation on the perception of American English voiceless lingual fricatives. Journal of the Phonetic Society of Japan, 14, 48–59.Google Scholar

Munson, B., Crocker, L., Pierrehumbert, J. B., Owen-Anderson, A., & Zucker, K. J. (2015). Gender typicality in children’s speech: A comparison of boys with and without gender identity disorder. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 137, 1995–2003.Google Scholar

Munson, B., Jefferson, S. V., & McDonald, E. C. (2006). The influence of perceived sexual orientation on fricative identification. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 119, 2427–2437.Google Scholar

Munson, B., Lackas, N., & Koeppe, K. (2019). The longitudinal development of gendered speech production in children: Patterns and predictors. Paper presented at the 2019 Boston University Conference on Language Development, Boston, MA.Google Scholar

Munson, B., McDonald, E. C., DeBoe, N. L., & White, A. R. (2006). Acoustic and perceptual bases of judgments of women and men’s sexual orientation from read speech. Journal of Phonetics, 34, 202–240.Google Scholar

Munson, B., Ryherd, K., & Kemper, S. (2017). Implicit and explicit gender priming in English lingual sibilant fricative perception. Linguistics, 55, 1073–1108.Google Scholar

Samal, A., Subramani, V., & Marx, D. (2007). Analysis of sexual dimorphism in human face. Journal of Visual Communication and Image Representation, 18, 453–463.Google Scholar

Stevens, K. N., Li, Z., Lee, C., & Keyser, S. J. (2004). A note on Mandarin fricatives and enhancement. In Fujisaki, H, Fant, G, Cao, J, and Xu, Y (Eds.), From traditional phonology to modern speech processing (pp. 393–403). Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.Google Scholar

Strand, E., & Johnson, K. (1996). Gradient and visual speaker normalization in the perception of fricatives. In Gibbon, D (Ed.), Natural language processing and speech technology: Results of the 3rd KONVENS conference, Bielfelt (pp. 14–26). New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar

Stuart-Smith, J. (2007). Empirical evidence for gendered speech production: /s/in Glaswegian. In Cole, J & Hualde, J. I. (Eds.), Laboratory phonology 9 (pp. 65–86). New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar

Van Bezooijen, R. (1995). Sociocultural aspects of pitch differences between Japanese and Dutch women. Language and Speech, 38, 253–265.Google Scholar

Winn, M., Rhone, A., Chatterjee, M., & Idsardi, W. (2013). The use of auditory and visual context in speech perception by listeners with normal hearing and listeners with cochlear implants. Frontiers in Psychology, 4, 824.Google Scholar

Baese-Berk, M. M. (2019). Interactions between speech perception and production during learning of novel phonemic categories. Attention, Perception, and Psychophysics, 81(4), 981–1005.Google Scholar

Baese-Berk, M. M., & Samuel, A. G. (2016). Listeners beware: Speech production may be bad for learning speech sounds. Journal of Memory and Language, 89, 23–36.Google Scholar

Bornkessel-Schlesewsky, I., & Schlesewsky, M. (2009). The role of prominence information in the real-time comprehension of transitive constructions: A cross-linguistic approach. Language and Linguistics Compass, 3(1), 19–58.Google Scholar

Christensen, L. A., & Humes, L. E. (1997). Identification of multidimensional stimuli containing speech cues and the effects of training. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 102, 2297–2310.Google Scholar

Chun, M. M., Golomb, J. D., & Turk-Browne, N. B. (2011). A taxonomy of external and internal attention. Annual Review of Psychology, 62, 73–101.Google Scholar

Delancey, S. (1981). An interpretation of split ergativity and related patterns. Language, 57, 626–657.Google Scholar

Forrest, L. B. (1996). Discourse goals and attentional processes in sentence production: The dynamic construal of events. Conceptual structure, discourse and language. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar

Francis, A. L., Baldwin, K., & Nusbaum, H. C. (2000). Effects of training on attention to acoustic cues. Attention, Perception, and Psychophysics, 62, 1668–1680.Google Scholar

Francis, A. L., & Nusbaum, H. C. (2002). Selective attention and the acquisition of new phonetic categories. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 28, 349–366.Google Scholar

Gandour, J. (1983). Tone perception in Far Eastern languages. Journal of Phonetics, 11, 149–175.Google Scholar

Gandour, J. (1984). Tone dissimilarity judgments by Chinese listeners. Journal of Chinese Linguistics, 12, 235–261.Google Scholar

Gildea, S. (2012). The referential hierarchy and attention. Faits de Langues, 39, 33–47.Google Scholar

Guion, S. G., & Pederson, E. (2007). Investigating the role of attention in phonetic learning. In Bohn, O. S. & Munro, M (Eds.), Language experience in second language speech learning (pp. 57–77). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Iverson, P., Kuhl, P. K., Akahane-Yamada, R., Diesch, E., Tohkura, Y., Kettermann, A., & Siebert, C. (2003). A perceptual interference account of acquisition difficulties for non-native phonemes. Cognition, 87, 47–57.Google Scholar

Kuhl, P. K., Conboy, B. T., Coffey-Corina, S., Padden, D., Rivera-Gaxiola, M., & Nelson, T. (2008). Phonetic learning as a pathway to language: new data and native language magnet theory expanded (NLM-e). Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 363(1493), 979–1000.Google Scholar

Kuhl, P. K., & Iverson, P. (1995). Linguistic experience and the perceptual magnet effect. In Strange, W (Ed.), Speech perception and linguistic experience: Issues in cross-language research (pp. 121–154). Timonium, MD: York Press.Google Scholar

Logan, J. S., Lively, S. E., & Pisoni, D. B. (1991). Training Japanese listeners to identify English /r/ and /l/: A first report. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 89, 874–886.Google Scholar

Myachykov, A., Thompson, D., Scheepers, C., & Garrod, S. (2011). Visual attention and structural choice in sentence production across languages. Language and Linguistics Compass, 5(2), 95–107.Google Scholar

Myachykov, A., Tomlin, R. S., & Posner, M. I. (2005). Attention and empirical studies of grammar. The Linguistic Review, 22, 347–364.Google Scholar

Pederson, E., & Guion-Anderson, S. (2010). Orienting attention during phonetic training facilitates learning. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 127, 54–59.Google Scholar

Pisoni, D. B. (1993). Long-term memory in speech perception: Some new findings on talker variability, speaking rate and perceptual learning. Speech Communication, 13, 109–125.Google Scholar

Polka, L. (1992). Characterizing the influence of native language experience on adult speech perception. Attention, Perception, and Psychophysics, 52, 37–52.Google Scholar

Posner, M. I. (1980). Orienting of attention. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 32, 2–25.Google Scholar

Posner, M. I., & Peterson, S. E. (1990). The attention system of the human brain. Annual Review of Neuroscience, 13, 25–42.Google Scholar

Schmidt, R. (2001). Attention. In Robinson, P (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 3–32). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Strange, W. (2011). Automatic selective perception (ASP) of first and second language speech: A working model. Journal of Phonetics, 39, 456–466.Google Scholar

Strange, W., & Shafer, V. L. (2008). Speech perception in second language learners: The re-education of selective perception. In Edwards, J. G. H. & Zampini, M. L. (Eds.), Phonology and second language acquisition (pp. 153–191). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Tomlin, R. S. (1995). Focal attention, voice, and word order. In Downing, P & Noonan, M (Eds.), Word order in discourse (pp. 517–552). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Tomlin, R. S. (1997). Mapping conceptual representations into linguistic representations: The role of attention in grammar. In Nuyts, J & Pederson, E (Eds.), Language and conceptualization (pp. 162–189). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Tomlin, R. S., & Villa, V. (1994). Attention in cognitive science and second language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 16, 183–203.Google Scholar

Wang, Y., Spence, M. M., Jongman, A., & Sereno, J. A. (1999). Training American listeners to perceive Mandarin tones. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 106, 3649–3658.Google Scholar

Werker, J. F., & Tees, R. C. (1984). Phonemic and phonetic factors in adult cross-language speech perception. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 75, 1866–1878.Google Scholar