1887
Volume 11, Issue 3
  • ISSN 2215-1931
  • E-ISSN: 2215-194X

Abstract

Understanding how production and perception interact in second language (L2) phonetic learning remains an open question, with conflicting evidence about the role of production in perceptual training. This study investigates the effects of the timing of production during discrimination training on learning the English /l/–/r/ contrast. Forty-six Japanese learners of English were assigned to one of three training groups: Production-first group, where participants repeated a stimulus before answering a perceptual question; Production-last group, where participants repeated a stimulus after answering a perceptual question; and Perception-only group, where no production was involved. All groups completed a discrimination task before and after training. Results revealed that the Perception-only and Production-first groups significantly improved discrimination accuracy while the Production-last group did not. These findings suggest that although repeating a stimulus during discrimination training does not always disrupt learning, perception-only training consistently brings about better learning outcomes in L2 perception.

Available under the CC BY 4.0 license.
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/jslp.24014.ued
2025-08-18
2026-07-19
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/jslp.24014.ued.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1075/jslp.24014.ued&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Akahane-Yamada, R., Adachi, T., & Kawahara, H.
    (1997) Second language production training using spectrographic representations as feedback. Journal of the Acoustical Society of Japan (E), 18(6), 341–343. 10.1250/ast.18.341
    https://doi.org/10.1250/ast.18.341 [Google Scholar]
  2. Aliaga-Garcia, C., & Mora, J. C.
    (2009) Assessing the effects of phonetic training on L2 sound perception and production. InM. A. Watkins, A. S. Rauber, & B. O. Baptista (Eds.), Recent research in second language phonetics/phonology: perception and production (pp.2–31). Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Antolík, T. K., Pillot-Loiseau, C., & Kamiyama, T.
    (2019) The effectiveness of real-time ultrasound visual feedback on tongue movements in L2 pronunciation training. Journal of Second Language Pronunciation, 5(1), 72–97. 10.1075/jslp.16022.ant
    https://doi.org/10.1075/jslp.16022.ant [Google Scholar]
  4. 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(2), 233–250. 10.1016/S0095‑4470(03)00036‑6
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0095-4470(03)00036-6 [Google Scholar]
  5. Baese-Berk, M. M.
    (2010) An examination of the relationship between speech perception and production [Doctoral dissertation, Northwestern University].
  6. (2019) Interactions between speech perception and production during learning of novel phonemic categories. Attention, Perception, and Psychophysics, 81(4), 981–1005. 10.3758/s13414‑019‑01725‑4
    https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-019-01725-4 [Google Scholar]
  7. Baese-Berk, M. M., & Samuel, A. G.
    (2016) Listeners beware: Speech production may be bad for learning speech sounds. Journal of Memory and Language, 891, 23–36. 10.1016/j.jml.2015.10.008
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2015.10.008 [Google Scholar]
  8. (2022) Just give it time: Differential effects of disruption and delay on perceptual learning. Atten Percept Psychophys, 84(3), 960–980. 10.3758/s13414‑022‑02463‑w
    https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-022-02463-w [Google Scholar]
  9. Best, C. T.
    (1995) A direct realist view of cross-language speech perception. InW. Strange (Ed.), Speech Perception and Linguistic Experience. Issues in Cross-Language Research (pp.171–204). York Press. 10.1016/0378‑4266(91)90103‑S
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-4266(91)90103-S [Google Scholar]
  10. Best, C. T., & Tyler, M. D.
    (2007) Nonnative and second-language speech perception: Commonalities and complementarities. InO. S. Bohn & M. J. Munro (Eds.), Language experience in second language speech learning: In honor of James Emil Flege (pp.13–34). John Benjamins. 10.1075/lllt.17.07bes
    https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.17.07bes [Google Scholar]
  11. Boersma, P.
    (2001) Praat, a system for doing phonetics by computer. Inwww.praat.org/
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Bradlow, A. R., Akahane-Yamada, R., Pisoni, D. B., & Tohkura, Y. I.
    (1999) Training Japanese listeners to identify English /r/ and /l/: Long-term retention of learning in perception and production. Perception and Psychophysics, 61(5), 977–985. 10.3758/BF03206911
    https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03206911 [Google Scholar]
  13. Bradlow, A. R., Pisoni, D. B., Akahane-Yamada, R., & Tohkura, Y. I.
    (1997) Training Japanese listeners to identify English /r/ and /l/: IV. Some effects of perceptual learning on speech production. The Journal of Acoustic Society of America, 101(4), 2299–2310. 10.1121/1.418276
    https://doi.org/10.1121/1.418276 [Google Scholar]
  14. Cramer, D., & Howitt, D.
    (2004) The SAGE Dictionary of Statistics: A Practical Resource for Students in the Social Sciences. SAGE Publications. 10.4135/9780857020123
    https://doi.org/10.4135/9780857020123 [Google Scholar]
  15. Darcy, I., Mora, J. C., & Daidone, D.
    (2014) Attention control and inhibition influence phonological development in a second language. Concordia Working Papers in Applied Linguistics, 51, 115–129.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Derwing, T. M., Munro, M. J., & Thomson, R. I.
    (2008) A longitudinal study of ESL learners’ fluency and comprehensibility development. Applied Linguistics, 29(3), 359–380. 10.1093/applin/amm041
    https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amm041 [Google Scholar]
  17. Drummond, A.
    (2021) Ibex Farm. https://spellout.net/ibexfarm
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Flege, J. E.
    (1995) Second language speech learning: Theory, findings, and problems. InW. Strange (Ed.), Speech Perception and Linguistic Experience: Issues in Cross-Language Research (pp.229–273). York Press. 10.1111/j.1600‑0404.1995.tb01710.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0404.1995.tb01710.x [Google Scholar]
  19. Gökgöz-Kurt, B.
    (2016) Attention control and the effects of online training in improving connected speech perception by learners of English as a second language [Doctoral dissertation, University of South Carolina].
  20. Herd, W., Jongman, A., & Sereno, J.
    (2013) Perceptual and production training of intervocalic /d, r, r/ in American English learners of Spanish. J Acoust Soc Am, 133(6), 4247–4255. 10.1121/1.4802902
    https://doi.org/10.1121/1.4802902 [Google Scholar]
  21. Hirata, Y., & Kelly, S. D.
    (2010) Effects of lips and hands on auditory learning of second-language speech sounds. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 53(2), 298–310. 10.1044/1092‑4388(2009/08‑0243)
    https://doi.org/10.1044/1092-4388(2009/08-0243) [Google Scholar]
  22. Iino, A.
    (2019) Effects of HVPT on perception and production of English fricatives by Japanese learners of English. InCALL and Complexity — Short Papers from EUROCALL 2019 (pp.186–192). 10.14705/rpnet.2019.38.1007
    https://doi.org/10.14705/rpnet.2019.38.1007 [Google Scholar]
  23. Iino, A., & Thomson, R. I.
    (2018) Effects of web-based HVPT on EFL learners’ recognition and production of L2 sounds. InFuture-Proof CALL: Language Learning as Exploration and Encounters — Short Papers from EUROCALL 2018 (pp.106–111). 10.14705/rpnet.2018.26.821
    https://doi.org/10.14705/rpnet.2018.26.821 [Google Scholar]
  24. Iino, A., Yabuta, Y., & Wistner, B.
    (2020) Effects and users’ reactions to the use of CAPT and HVPT on Japanese EFL learners’ segmental perception and production. InK.-M. Frederiksen, S. Larsen, L. Bradley, & S. Thouësny (Eds.), CALL for Widening Participation: Short Papers from EUROCALL 2020 (pp.107–113). Research-publishing.net. 10.14705/rpnet.2020.48.1173
    https://doi.org/10.14705/rpnet.2020.48.1173 [Google Scholar]
  25. Inceoglu, S.
    (2016) Effects of perceptual training on second language vowel perception and production. Applied Psycholinguistics, 37(5), 1175–1199. 10.1017/S0142716415000533
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716415000533 [Google Scholar]
  26. Inceoglu, S., Chen, W.-H., & Lim, H.
    (2023) Assessment of L2 intelligibility: Comparing L1 listeners and automatic speech recognition. ReCALL, 35(1), 89–104. 10.1017/S0958344022000192
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0958344022000192 [Google Scholar]
  27. Inceoglu, S., & Gnevsheva, K.
    (2020) Ultrasound imaging in the foreign language classroom: Outcomes, challenges, and students’ perceptions. InO. Kang, S. Staples, K. Yaw, & K. Hirschi (Eds.), Proceedings of the 11th Pronunciation in Second Language Learning and Teaching Conference, Northern Arizona University, September 2019 (pp.115–126).
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Jamieson, D. G., & Morosan, D. E.
    (1986) Training non-native speech contrasts in adults: Acquisition of the English /ð/-/θ/ contrast by francophones. Perception & Psychophysics, 40(4), 205–215. 10.3758/BF03211500
    https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03211500 [Google Scholar]
  29. Kartushina, N., Hervais-Adelman, A., Frauenfelder, U. H., & Golestani, N.
    (2015) The effect of phonetic production training with visual feedback on the perception and production of foreign speech sounds. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 138(2), 817–832. 10.1121/1.4926561
    https://doi.org/10.1121/1.4926561 [Google Scholar]
  30. Kühnert, B., & Pillot-Loiseau, C.
    (2022) Teaching pronunciation with direct visual articulatory feedback: Pedagogical considerations for the use of ultrasound in the classroom. Pronunciation Matters: Current Perspectiveson Teaching and Learning L2 Phonology, 551. https://hal.science/hal-03838029. 10.4000/ranam.364
    https://doi.org/10.4000/ranam.364 [Google Scholar]
  31. 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. 10.18637/jss.v082.i13
    https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v082.i13 [Google Scholar]
  32. Lacabex, E. G., Lecumberri, M. L. G., & Cooke, M.
    (2008) Identification of the contrast full vowel-schwa: Training effects and generalization to a new perceptual context. Ilha do Desterro A Journal of English Language, Literatures in English and Cultural Studies, 551, 173–196. 10.5007/2175‑8026.2008n55p173
    https://doi.org/10.5007/2175-8026.2008n55p173 [Google Scholar]
  33. Lambacher, S.
    (1999) A call tool for improving second language acquisition of English consonants by Japanese learners. International Journal of Phytoremediation, 21(1), 137–156. 10.1076/call.12.2.137.5722
    https://doi.org/10.1076/call.12.2.137.5722 [Google Scholar]
  34. Lengeris, A.
    (2018) Computer-based auditory training improves second-language vowel production in spontaneous speech. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 144(3), EL165–EL171. 10.1121/1.5052201
    https://doi.org/10.1121/1.5052201 [Google Scholar]
  35. Lenth, R. V.
    (2023) emmeans: Estimated Marginal Means, aka Least-Squares Means. Inhttps://CRAN.R-project.org/package=emmeans
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Lively, S. E., Pisoni, D. B., Akahane-Yamada, R., Tohkura, Y. I., & Yamada, T.
    (1994) Training Japanese listeners to identify English /r/ and /l/. III. Long-term retention of new phonetic categories. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 96(4), 2076–2087. 10.1121/1.410149
    https://doi.org/10.1121/1.410149 [Google Scholar]
  37. Logan, J. S., Lively, S. E., & Pisoni, D. B.
    (1991) Training Japanese Listeners To Identify English /R/ And /1/: A First Report. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 89(2), 874–886–874–886. 10.1121/1.1894649
    https://doi.org/10.1121/1.1894649 [Google Scholar]
  38. Lu, S., Wayland, R., & Kaan, E.
    (2015) Effects of production training and perception training on lexical tone perception — A behavioral and ERP study. Brain Research, 16241, 28–44. 10.1016/j.brainres.2015.07.014
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brainres.2015.07.014 [Google Scholar]
  39. Lüdecke, D.
    (2024) sjPlot: Data Visualization for Statistics in Social Science. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=sjPlot
  40. McCrocklin, S.
    (2019) ASR-based dictation practice for second language pronunciation improvement. Journal of Second Language Pronunciation, 5(1), 98–118. 10.1075/jslp.16034.mcc
    https://doi.org/10.1075/jslp.16034.mcc [Google Scholar]
  41. Monsell, S.
    (2003) Task switching. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7(3), 134–140. 10.1016/S1364‑6613(03)00028‑7
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S1364-6613(03)00028-7 [Google Scholar]
  42. Nagle, C. L.
    (2018) Examining the temporal structure of the perception–production link in second language acquisition: A longitudinal study. Language Learning, 68(1), 234–270. 10.1111/lang.12275
    https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12275 [Google Scholar]
  43. Nakata, T.
    (2015) Effects of expanding and equal spacing on second language vocabulary learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 37(4), 677–711. 10.1017/S0272263114000825
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263114000825 [Google Scholar]
  44. Nishi, K., & Kewley-Port, D.
    (2007) Training Japanese listeners to perceive American English vowels: Influence of training sets. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 50(6), 1496–1509. 10.1044/1092‑4388(2007/103)
    https://doi.org/10.1044/1092-4388(2007/103) [Google Scholar]
  45. Noguchi, M., Yamane, N., Tsuda, A., Kazama, M., Kim, B., & Gick, B.
    (2015, September). Towards protocols for L2 pronunciation training using ultrasound imaging [Poster presentation]. The 7th annual Pronunciation in Second Language Learning and Teaching conference, Texas A&M University.
    [Google Scholar]
  46. Okuno, T., & Hardison, D. M.
    (2016) Perception-production link in L2 Japanese vowel duration: Training with technology. Language Learning and Technology, 20(2), 61–80.
    [Google Scholar]
  47. Qian, M., Chukharev-Hudilainen, E., & Levis, J.
    (2018) A system for adaptive high-variability segmental perceptual training: Implementation, effectiveness, transfer. Language Learning and Technology, 22(1), 69–96. 10125/44582
    https://doi.org/10125/44582 [Google Scholar]
  48. R Core Team
    R Core Team (2023) R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. InR Foundation for Statistical Computing. https://www.R-project.org/
    [Google Scholar]
  49. Saito, K., & Lyster, R.
    (2012) Effects of form-focused instruction and corrective feedback on L2 pronunciation development of /ɹ/ by Japanese learners of English. Language Learning, 62(2), 595–633. 10.1111/j.1467‑9922.2011.00639.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2011.00639.x [Google Scholar]
  50. Sakai, M.
    (2016) (Dis)connecting perception and production: training adult native speakers of Spanish on the English /i/–/ɪ/ distinction
    [Google Scholar]
  51. Sakai, M., & Moorman, C.
    (2017) Can perception training improve the production of second language phonemes? A meta-analytic review of 25 years of perception training research. Applied Psycholinguistics, 39(1), 187–224. 10.1017/S0142716417000418
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716417000418 [Google Scholar]
  52. Shinohara, Y., & Iverson, P.
    (2018) High variability identification and discrimination training for Japanese speakers learning English /r/–/l/. Journal of Phonetics, 661, 242–251. 10.1016/j.wocn.2017.11.002
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wocn.2017.11.002 [Google Scholar]
  53. Strange, W.
    (1992) Learning non-native phoneme contrasts: Interactions among subject, stimulus, and task variables. InY. I. Tohkura, E. Vatikiotis-Bateson, & Y. Sagisaka (Eds.), Speech Perception, Production and Linguistic Structure (pp.197–219). Ohmsa.
    [Google Scholar]
  54. Strange, W., & Dittmann, S.
    (1984) Effects of discrimination training on the perception of /r-l/ by Japanese adults learning English. Perception & Psychophysics, 36(2), 131–145. 10.3758/BF03202673
    https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03202673 [Google Scholar]
  55. Thomson, R. I.
    (2018) High Variability [Pronunciation] Training (HVPT): A proven technique about which every language teacher and learner ought to know. Journal of Second Language Pronunciation, 4(2), 208–231. 10.1075/jslp.17038.tho
    https://doi.org/10.1075/jslp.17038.tho [Google Scholar]
  56. Thorin, J.
    (2020) Can you hear what you cannot say? The interactions of speech perception and production during non-native phoneme learning [Doctoral dissertation, Radboud University].
  57. Thorin, J., Sadakata, M., Desain, P., & McQueen, J. M.
    (2018) Perception and production in interaction during non-native speech category learning. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 144(1), 92–103. 10.1121/1.5044415
    https://doi.org/10.1121/1.5044415 [Google Scholar]
  58. Uchihara, T., Karas, M., & Thomson, R. I.
    (2024) Does perceptual high variability phonetic training improve L2 speech production? A meta-analysis of perception-production connection. Applied Psycholinguistics, 45(4), 591–623. 10.1017/S0142716424000195
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716424000195 [Google Scholar]
  59. Ueda, R., & Hashimoto, K.
    (2019) Perceptual training in a classroom setting: Phonemic category formation by Japanese EFL learners. InJ. M. Levis, C. Nagle, & E. Todey (Eds.), Proceedings of the 10th Pronunciation in Second Language Learning and Teaching Conference, Iowa State University, September 2018 (pp.237–249).
    [Google Scholar]
  60. Wright, J.
    (2021) Factors affecting the incidental formation of novel suprasegmental categories [Doctoral dissertation, University of Oregon].
/content/journals/10.1075/jslp.24014.ued
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/jslp.24014.ued
Loading

Data & Media loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error