Department of Psychology, University of Southampton, Highfield, Southampton, Hampshire SO17 1BJ, UK.
Neuropsychologia. 2018 Jul 31;116(Pt B):162-178. doi: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2017.07.005. Epub 2017 Jul 8.
Thirty years on from their initial observation that familiar voice recognition is not the same as unfamiliar voice discrimination (van Lancker and Kreiman, 1987), the current paper reviews available evidence in support of a distinction between familiar and unfamiliar voice processing. Here, an extensive review of the literature is provided, drawing on evidence from four domains of interest: the neuropsychological study of healthy individuals, neuropsychological investigation of brain-damaged individuals, the exploration of voice recognition deficits in less commonly studied clinical conditions, and finally empirical data from healthy individuals. All evidence is assessed in terms of its contribution to the question of interest - is familiar voice processing distinct from unfamiliar voice processing. In this regard, the evidence provides compelling support for van Lancker and Kreiman's early observation. Two considerations result: First, the limits of research based on one or other type of voice stimulus are more clearly appreciated. Second, given the demonstration of a distinction between unfamiliar and familiar voice processing, a new wave of research is encouraged which examines the transition involved as a voice is learned.
三十年前，van Lancker 和 Kreiman 最初观察到熟悉的语音识别与不熟悉的语音辨别不同，自此之后，目前的论文回顾了支持熟悉和不熟悉语音处理之间存在区别的现有证据。在这里，从四个感兴趣的领域提供了广泛的文献综述，借鉴了以下领域的证据：健康个体的神经心理学研究、脑损伤个体的神经心理学研究、对不太常见临床病症中的语音识别缺陷的探索，以及最后来自健康个体的实证数据。所有证据都根据其对感兴趣问题的贡献进行了评估——即熟悉的语音处理是否与不熟悉的语音处理不同。在这方面，证据有力地支持了 van Lancker 和 Kreiman 的早期观察。这带来了两个考虑因素：首先，更清楚地认识到基于一种或另一种类型的语音刺激的研究的局限性。其次，鉴于已经证明了不熟悉和熟悉的语音处理之间存在区别，鼓励开展新一波研究，以检查随着语音的学习而涉及的转变。
