Figure 1.
Rating scores (A) and reaction times (B) for four types of prosodies in Experiment 1 (M±se).
In this figure, as in the following ones, Asterisk (*) indicates a significant response difference at P<0.05, ** at P<0.01, and ** * at P<0.001.
Figure 2.
Behavioral results of Experiment 2.
Error rates (A, M±se) and Reaction times (B) for three types of critical prosodies under two task conditions (left: emotion task; right: intensity task). Error rates (C) and Reaction times (D) for fillers and “AA” baseline prosodies under two task conditions.
Figure 3.
Grand-average ERP waveforms for critical prosodies.
A: ERPs elicited by three types of prosodies at selected electrode sites. In this figure, the amplitude (in microvolt) is plotted on ordinate (negative up) and the time (in milliseconds) is on abscissa. B: Difference waves (NA minus AA versus NAL minus AA). C: Topographies of difference curves (viewed from the top) in the selected time periods.
Figure 4.
The average oscillatory activities for various critical prosodies and task conditions.
The time–frequency map shows oscillatory activities at Cz electrodes the over time (x-axis; 0 is onset of splicing point) and frequency (y-axis). Red colors indicate more power increase and blue colors indicate more power decrease relative to baseline. Topographical map show data taken from a 100- to 600-ms, 4- to 6-Hz window.
Figure 5.
Grand-average ERP waveforms and average oscillatory activities for for fillers and “AA” baseline prosodies under two task conditions.
(Up): ERPs elicited by fillers and “AA” prosodies and difference waves at CZ and Topographies of difference curves. (Below): The time-frequency map shows oscillatory activities at Cz electrodes over the selected time window and frequency band.
Figure 6.
Acoustic feature for four prosody types used in Experiment 1.
The dataset consists of oscillogram (up) and voice spectrographs (down) with uncorrected pitch contours (blue line) and intensity contours (yellow line) superimposed. As shown, angry prosodies have higher mean F0 (197 Hz vs. 132 Hz, t(49) = 28.12, p<.001) and intensity (70 dB vs. 63 dB, t(49) = 23.18, p<.001), and faster speech rate (206 ms vs. 216 ms per syllable, t(49) = 5.43, p<.01) than neutral prosodies, however, the intensity modified H-neutral and L-angry prosodies share same level of intensity with angry and neutral prosodies respectively while other acoustic parameters remain unchanged.
Figure 7.
Illustration of the splicing procedure and acoustic feature of three types of prosody used in Experiment 2.
As in Experiment 1, the dataset consists of oscillogram (up) and voice spectrographs (down) with uncorrected pitch contours (blue line) and intensity contours (yellow line) superimposed. (Abbr.: AA—all Angry; NA—Neutral-to-Angry; NAL—Neutral-to-low Angry). The correct response was “no-change” for AA and “change” for both NA and NAL under emotion task, whereas under sound intensity task, the correct responses were “no-change” for both AA and NAL but “change” for NA. Moreover, the fillers provided the counterbalance responses under both tasks.