EDP Sciences logo
Web of Conferences logo
Search
Menu
All issues Volume 191 (2024) SHS Web Conf., 191 (2024) 10006 References
Open Access
Issue
SHS Web Conf.
Volume 191, 2024
9e Congrès Mondial de Linguistique Française
Article Number 10006
Number of page(s) 12
Section Psycholinguistique et acquisition
DOI https://doi.org/10.1051/shsconf/202419110006
Published online 28 June 2024
  1. Abbou, J., Arnold, A., Candea, M., & Marignier, N. (2018). Qui a peur de l’écriture inclusive ? Entre délire eschatologique et peur d’émasculation. Entretien. Revue de sémio-linguistique des textes et discours, 44, 133–151. [Google Scholar]
  2. Arnold, A., & Candea, M. (2015). Comment étudier l’influence des stéréotypes de genre et de race sur la perception de la parole? Langage et société, 152(2), 75‑96. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  3. Baayen, R. H., Davidson, D. J., & Bates, D. M. (2008). Mixed-effects modeling with crossed random effects for subjects and items. Journal of Memory and Language, 59(4), 390–412. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  4. Best, D. L., & Williams, J. E. (1997). Sex, Gender, and Culture. In J. W. Berry, M. H. Segall, & C. Kagitçibasi (Eds.), Handbook of Cross-cultural Psychology : Social Behavior and Applications (p. 163‑212). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon. [Google Scholar]
  5. Bidaud, É., & Megherbi, H. (2005). De l’oral à l’écrit. La lettre de l’enfance et de l’adolescence, 61(3), 19‑24. [Google Scholar]
  6. Brauer, M., & Landry, M. (2008). Un ministre peut-il tomber enceinte ? L’impact du générique masculin sur les représentations mentales. L’Année psychologique, 108(2), 243‑272. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  7. Christensen, R. H. B. (2022). Ordinal: Regression Models for Ordinal Data. R package version 2022.11–16. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=ordinal. [Google Scholar]
  8. Davis, M. H., & Johnsrude, I. S. (2007). Hearing speech sounds : Top-down influences on the interface between audition and speech perception. Hearing Research, 229(1), 132‑147. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  9. Dirven, R., & Oakeshott-Taylor, J. (1984). Listening comprehension (Part I). Language Teaching, 17(4), 326‑343. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  10. Ellemers, N. (2018). Gender Stereotypes. Annual Review of Psychology, 69(1), 275‑298. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Garnham, A. (1989). Inference in Language Understanding: What, When, Why and How. In R. Dietrich & C. F. Graumann (Eds.), Language processing in social context (vol. 54, p. 153‑172). New York, NY: North Holland. [Google Scholar]
  12. Garnham, A., Oakhill, J., & Reynolds, D. (2002). Are inferences from stereotyped role names to characters’ gender made elaboratively? Memory & Cognition, 30(3), 439‑446. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  13. Gygax, P., & Gabriel, U. (2011). Gender representation in language: More than meets the eye. In R. M. Mishra & N. Srinivasan (Ed.), Language & Cognition: State of the Art (p. 72–92). Munich, Allemagne: Lincom Europa. [Google Scholar]
  14. Gygax, P., Gabriel, U., Sarrasin, O., Oakhill, J., & Garnham, A. (2008). Generically intended, but specifically interpreted : When beauticians, musicians and mechanics are all men. Language and Cognitive Processes, 23(3), 464‑485. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  15. Gygax, P., Sarrasin, O., Lévy, A., Sato, S., & Gabriel, U. (2013). La représentation mentale du genre pendant la lecture : État actuel de la recherche francophone en psycholinguistique. Journal of French Language Studies, 23(2), 243‑257. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  16. Hansen, L. H., & Mengel-Niemann, K. S. (2020). Gender Bias in Language Comprehension : Exploring the Role of Gender Bias in Adjectives of the Danish Language. Journal of Language Works, 5(1), 5–22. [Google Scholar]
  17. Kim, J., Angst, S., Gygax, P., Gabriel, U., & Zufferey, S. (2023). The masculine bias in fully gendered languages and ways to avoid it: A study on gender neutral forms in Québec and Swiss French. Journal of French Language Studies, 33(1), 1‑26. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  18. Klofstad, C. A., Anderson, R. C., & Peters, S. (2012). Sounds like a winner : Voice pitch influences perception of leadership capacity in both men and women. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 279, 2698‑2704. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  19. Ko, S. J., Judd, C. M., & Blair, I. V. (2006). What the Voice Reveals : Within- and Between-Category Stereotyping on the Basis of Voice. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 32(6), 806‑819. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  20. Ko, S. J., Judd, C. M., & Stapel, D. A. (2009). Stereotyping Based on Voice in the Presence of Individuating Information : Vocal Femininity Affects Perceived Competence but Not Warmth. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 35(2), 198‑211. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  21. Magne, J., Lagabrielle, M.-C., & Felonneau, M. L. (2018). Les stéréotypes de sexe évoluent-ils ? Une étude exploratoire auprès d’étudiant.e.s français. L’orientation scolaire et professionnelle, 47(3), 495–520. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  22. Marin, B., & Legros, D. (2008). Psycholinguistique cognitive de la compréhension de textes. In Psycholinguistique cognitive (p. 61‑78). Bruxelles, Belgique: De Boeck Supérieur. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  23. Michaud, H. (2021). Rhétoriques réactionnaires et antiféminisme en France : La controverse de l’écriture inclusive. Politique et Sociétés, 40(1), 87‑107. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  24. Oakhill, J., Garnham, A., & Reynolds, D. (2005). Immediate activation of stereotypical gender information. Memory & Cognition, 33(6), 972‑983. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  25. Plante, I., Théorêt, M., & Favreau, O. (2010). Les stéréotypes de genre en mathématiques et en langues : Recension critique en regard de la réussite scolaire. Revue des sciences de l’éducation, 36(2), 389‑419. [Google Scholar]
  26. Richy, C., & Burnett, H. (2021). Démêler les effets des stéréotypes et le genre grammatical dans le biais masculin : Une approche expérimentale. GLAD! Revue sur le langage, le genre, les sexualités, 10, [en ligne]. [Google Scholar]
  27. Robb, M., Gilbert, H., & Lerman, J. (2005). Influence of gender and environmental setting on voice onset time. Folia Phoniatrica et Logopaedica: Official Organ of the International Association of Logopedics and Phoniatrics, 57(3), 125–133. [Google Scholar]
  28. Rohde, H., & Ettlinger, M. (2012). Integration of Pragmatic and Phonetic Cues in Spoken Word Recognition. Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition, 38(4), 967‑983. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  29. Sato, S., Gygax, P. M., & Gabriel, U. (2013). Gender inferences: Grammatical features and their impact on the representation of gender in bilinguals. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 16(4), 792‑807. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  30. Sauteur, T., Gygax, P., Tibblin, J., Escasain, L., & Sato, S. (2023). L’écriture inclusive, je ne connais pas très bien… mais je déteste ! GLAD!. Revue sur le langage, le genre, les sexualités, 14, [en ligne]. [Google Scholar]
  31. Simpson, A. P. (2009). Phonetic differences between male and female speech. Language and Linguistics Compass, 3(2), 621‑640. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  32. Strand, E. A., & Johnson, K. (1996). Gradient and Visual Speaker Normalization in the Perception of Fricatives. In D. Gibbon (Éd.), Natural Language Processing and Speech Technology: Results of the 3rd KONVENS Conference (p. 14‑26). Berlin, Allemagne: De Gruyter Mouton. [Google Scholar]
  33. Vaissière, J. (2015). La phonétique (3e éd.). Paris, France: Presses Universitaires de France. [Google Scholar]
  34. Wales, R. J., & Marshall, J. G. (1966). The organization of linguistic performance. In J. Lyons & R. J. Wales (Éds.), Psycholinguistic Papers. The Proceedings of the 1966 Edinburgh Conference (p. 29‑84). Édimbourg, Écosse: Edinburgh University Press. [Google Scholar]
  35. Warnke, L., & de Ruiter, J. P. (2023). Top-down effect of dialogue coherence on perceived speaker identity. Scientific Reports, 13(1), [en ligne]. [Google Scholar]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.