In real life, mest of the speech we are exposed to is accompanied by information ather than just the acoustic signal. We usually know things about the physical, sacial, and language context in which a sentence is being uttered, Such as who is uttering it. At thevery least, we can usually see the person who is talking (unless, of course, we are taiking on the phone or in two different rooms). Some work of Dr. Eric Vatikiotis-Bateson has investigated how much infomation people can extract from the visual signal underdifferent conditions. In Munhall et al. (2004), he and his colleagues manipulated videos of someone talking to be clearer or less clear by setting different filter conditions -- you can see example pictures from sach filter condition in Figure 1 in Munhall et al. (2004,p.577). The details of each fiter are not relevant for the current purpose.In each video, the talker in the video said a series of sentences in English. The audio of these sentences was partially masked by noise to make the task harder and make reliance on visual information more important. Munhall ct al. had native English speakerswalch each type of video and listen to the sentences; Ihe English speakers then had to verbally repeat as much ol each seritence as they coukt, and the researchers calcudated the percentage of key words corectly identified in the sentences. In one of the tasksthey report, they also manipulated the distance from the video that the English speakers were seated: 114 am, 228 cm, or 342 cm. The peroentage of words correctly identified are given in the folowing table (note that these are approximations of the percentcorrect from Figure 3 of the criginal paper, which provides only a graphical summary and nat a numerical one).Filter ConditionB C114em 33.0 48.0Vicwing distance 228crn 33.5 47.0312cm 33.0 50.0DEF52.044 047.557.046.047.557.012.540.0(a) What type of study is described above?OA. An observational study.OB. An experiment.OC. A sample survey.(b) What were the experimental units in this study?DA. The English speakers who watched and listencd to the videas.B. The talkers in the videos.OC. The percentage of key words correctly identified in the sentences.OD. The distarices the English speakers sat from the video.OE. The fiters.(c) What was the response?OA. The Erglish speakers who watched and listened to the videos.OB. The filters.OC. The percentage of key words correctly identified in the sentences.OD. The distances the English speakers sat from the video.DE. The talikers in the videos.(d) What is/are the factors in the study?OA. The number of different filters.OB. How well the English speakers understood the words in the vide0s.C. Fiter condition and viewing distance.OD. The English speakers who watched and listened to the videos.DE. The talkers in the videos.(e) How many treatments were there?OA.6OB. 2OC. 15OD. 3O E. 8(f) Based on just the numbers given above, which of the following is a reasonable conclusions from the study?DA. No factor investigated appears to impact the response variable.OB. Fiter condition seems to have more of an impact than viewing distance.OC. Verbally repeating English sentences is very easy for English speakers.OD. We should never listen to anyone we cannot see clearly.O E. Filler condilion seerns to have less of an impact than viewing distance.

Answered: Image /qna-images/answer/329b519e-083e-492f-88c5-6f49870dd10b.jpg

different conditions. In Munhall et al. (2004), he and his colleagues manipulated videos of someone talking to be clearer cr less clear by setting different filter conditions -- you can see example pictures from each filter condition in Figure 1 in Munhall et al. (2004, p.577). The details of each fiter are not relovant for the current purpose. In each video, the talker in the video said a series of sentences in English. The audio of these sentences was partially masked by noise to make the task harder and make reliance on visual information more important. Munhall et al. had native English speakers watch each type of video and listen to the sentencus; the English spaakars then had to verbally repeat as much of each sernterce as thay coukd, and the rasearchers calculatat the percentage of key words corectly identified in the sentences. In one of the tasks they report, they also manipulated the distance from the video that the English speakers were seated: 114 am, 228 cm, or 342 cm. The percentage of words correctly identified are given in the following table (note that these are approximations of the percent corect from Figure 3 ol the criginal paper, which provides only a graphical summary and nat a numerical one). Filter Condition B D E 1dem 33.0 48.0 Viewing distance 228cm 33.5 47.0 342cm 33.0 50,0 52.0 44.0 47.5 57.0 46.0 47.5 57.0 12.5 40.0 (a) What type of study is described above? OA. An observational study. OB. An experiment. OC. A sample survey. (b) What were the experimental units in this study? OA. The English speakers who watched and listened to the videos. OB. The talkers in the videos. OC. The percantage of key words correctly itentified in the sentences OD. The distances the English spwakers sat from the video. OE. The fiters (c) What was the response? OA. The English speakers who watched and listened to the videos. OB. The filtors. OC. The percentage of key words correctly identified in the sentences. D. The distances the English speakers sat from the video. OE. The talkers in the videos. (d) What is/are the factors in the study? OA. The number of different filters. OB. How well the English spoakers understood the words in the videos. OC. Fiter condition and viewing distance OD. The English speakers who watched and listened to the videos. OE. The talkers in the videos. (0) How many treatments were there? OA. 6 OB. 2 OC. 15 OD. 3 OE. 8 (f) Based on just the numbers given above, which of the following is a reasonable conclusions from the study? OA. No factor investigated appears to impact the response variable. OB. Fiter conditicn seoms to have more of an impact than viewing distance. OC. Verbally repeating English sentences is very easy for English speakers. OD. We should never listen to anyone we cannot see clearly. OE. Filter condition seerns to have less of an impact than viewing distance