Sentence examples for unintelligible condition from inspiring English sources

For each participant, each sentence occurred once in an intelligible condition (16 or 4 channel) and once in an unintelligible condition (4 channel rotated or 1 channel).

In studies using these stimuli, we have found robust activation in the anterior and posterior temporal cortices when responses to the (mostly) intelligible condition were compared with the unintelligible condition (McGettigan and Evans et al. 2012; Rosen et al. 2011).

Accuracy for these unintelligible conditions did not differ from each other (P = 0.38), assessed by a nonparametric sign test.

An idealized intelligibility response would be described by a region that responded equivalently and positively to the 2 intelligible conditions (clear and NV), and equivalently (and negatively) to the 2 unintelligible conditions (rot and rotNV).

The interaction was driven by a relative deactivation to rotNV; in other words, there was no evidence that the intelligible conditions (NV and clear) differed from one another, but the unintelligible conditions (rot and rotNV) differed from one another dependent on the level of spectral detail.

It would be possible for a region to exhibit a high level of classification solely because of a relative increase in signal to the unintelligible conditions, which would be hard to reconcile with the suggestion that an area coded a response to fully resolved intelligible speech percepts.

Here, we test fully intelligible speech (16 channel), moderately intelligible speech (4 channel), and 2 unintelligible control conditions (4 channel rotated and 1 channel).

It may be that this region of the left posterior STS engages in acoustic phonetic processing that supports the resolution of intelligible percepts, explaining its elevated response to the unintelligible rotated speech condition as well as to the intelligible stimuli.

We next conducted a whole-brain analysis on source-localized data to see whether the unintelligible 1 channel condition showed significantly greater coherence between the neural and acoustic data than that seen in random pairings of acoustic envelopes and neural data.

Both the 1 channel and 4 channel rotated conditions are unintelligible but, because of their preserved rhythmic properties (and the experimental context), were likely perceived as speech or speech-like by listeners.

To confirm that the intelligibility manipulations worked as intended, we analyzed participants' word report data, shown in Figure  1 E. As expected, the 1 channel (M = 0.1%, SD = 0.1%, range = 0.0 0.6%) and 4 channel rotated (M = 0.2%, SD = 0.1%, range = 0.0 0.4%) conditions were unintelligible with essentially zero word report.