Improvements to Creativity in Singing Abilities Based on Perspective of Studies on Interaction between Speech Production and Auditory Perception

2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Masashi Unoki ◽  
Kazushi Nishimoto
Keyword(s):  
Speech Production ◽  
Auditory Perception

Auditory Perception vs. Speech Production in Children

2018 ◽  
Vol 71 (12) ◽  
pp. 14 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jane R. Madell ◽  
Joan G. Hewitt ◽  
Sylvia Rotfleisch
Keyword(s):  
Speech Production ◽  
Auditory Perception

scholarly journals Recalibration of auditory perception of speech due to orofacial somatosensory inputs during speech motor adaptation

2019 ◽  
Vol 122 (5) ◽  
pp. 2076-2084
Author(s):  
Hiroki Ohashi ◽  
Takayuki Ito
Keyword(s):  
Speech Production ◽  
Auditory Feedback ◽  
Auditory Perception ◽  
Somatosensory System ◽  
Motor Adaptation ◽  
Forward Direction ◽  
Speech Motor Control ◽  
Before And After ◽  
Speech Motor

Speech motor control and learning rely on both somatosensory and auditory inputs. Somatosensory inputs associated with speech production can also affect the process of auditory perception of speech, and the somatosensory-auditory interaction may play a fundamental role in auditory perception of speech. In this report, we show that the somatosensory system contributes to perceptual recalibration, separate from its role in motor function. Subjects participated in speech motor adaptation to altered auditory feedback. Auditory perception of speech was assessed in phonemic identification tests before and after speech adaptation. To investigate a role of the somatosensory system in motor adaptation and subsequent perceptual change, we applied orofacial skin stretch in either a backward or forward direction during the auditory feedback alteration as a somatosensory modulation. We found that the somatosensory modulation did not affect the amount of adaptation at the end of training, although it changed the rate of adaptation. However, the perception following speech adaptation was altered depending on the direction of the somatosensory modulation. Somatosensory inflow rather than motor outflow thus drives changes to auditory perception of speech following speech adaptation, suggesting that somatosensory inputs play an important role in tuning of perceptual system. NEW & NOTEWORTHY This article reports that the somatosensory system works not equally with the motor system, but predominantly in the calibration of auditory perception of speech by speech production.

Cochlear implantation in children with Waardenburg syndrome

2005 ◽  
Vol 119 (9) ◽  
pp. 719-723 ◽  
Author(s):  
A Daneshi ◽  
S Hassanzadeh ◽  
M Farhadi
Keyword(s):  
Speech Perception ◽  
Speech Production ◽  
Cochlear Implantation ◽  
Auditory Perception ◽  
Speech Intelligibility ◽  
Hearing Impaired ◽  
Type I ◽  
Waardenburg Syndrome ◽  
Retrospective Case ◽  
One Year

Waardenburg syndrome is an autosomal-dominant trait resulting from mutations occurring in different genes. It is often characterized by varying degrees of: congenital hearing loss; dystopia canthorum; synophrys; broad nasal root; depigmentation of hair (white forelock), skin or both; and heterochromic or hypochromic irides.A retrospective case study was done to assess speech perception, speech production, general intelligence and educational setting in six profoundly hearing-impaired children with Waardenburg syndrome (four with type I, one with type II and one with type III) ranging in age from two years to 14 years, seven months (mean = six years, six months). None of the patients had malformation of the cochlea and were implanted using Nucleus 22/24 and Med-el combi40+. Five out of the six cases were of average intelligence and one had a borderline intelligence quotient. The follow-up period ranged from one year, 10 months to six years, six months (mean = three years, six months) after implantation. The evaluation of auditory perception in patients was accomplished using the Persian Auditory Perception Test for the Hearing-Impaired, a Persian Spondee wordstest and the Categories of Auditory Performance Index. The Speech Intelligibility Rating test was used to evaluate speech production ability. All the patients’ speech perception and speech intelligibility capabilities improved considerably after receiving the implants, and they were able to be placed in regular educational settings. Patients used their cochlear-implant devices whenever awake, implying that they benefitted from the devices. We suggest that any further expansion of cochlear-implantation criteria in children include those with Waardenburg syndrome.

The Relationship Between Speech Production and Speech Perception Deficits in Parkinson's Disease

2016 ◽  
Vol 59 (5) ◽  
pp. 915-931 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kim De Keyser ◽  
Patrick Santens ◽  
Annelies Bockstael ◽  
Dick Botteldooren ◽  
Durk Talsma ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Parkinson’S Disease ◽  
Parkinson's Disease ◽  
Speech Perception ◽  
Speech Production ◽  
Auditory Perception ◽  
Speech Intelligibility ◽  
Acoustic Analysis ◽  
Estimation Task ◽  
Intensity Measurements ◽  
Intensity Perception

PurposeThis study investigated the possible relationship between hypokinetic speech production and speech intensity perception in patients with Parkinson's disease (PD).MethodParticipants included 14 patients with idiopathic PD and 14 matched healthy controls (HCs) with normal hearing and cognition. First, speech production was objectified through a standardized speech intelligibility assessment, acoustic analysis, and speech intensity measurements. Second, an overall estimation task and an intensity estimation task were addressed to evaluate overall speech perception and speech intensity perception, respectively. Finally, correlation analysis was performed between the speech characteristics of the overall estimation task and the corresponding acoustic analysis. The interaction between speech production and speech intensity perception was investigated by an intensity imitation task.ResultsAcoustic analysis and speech intensity measurements demonstrated significant differences in speech production between patients with PD and the HCs. A different pattern in the auditory perception of speech and speech intensity was found in the PD group.ConclusionsAuditory perceptual deficits may influence speech production in patients with PD. The present results suggest a disturbed auditory perception related to an automatic monitoring deficit in PD.

Evaluation of speech in patients after cochlear implantation – Motol Speech Scale

2021 ◽  
Vol 70 (3) ◽  
pp. 156-160
Author(s):  
Zdenka Aksenovová ◽  
Miroslav Okluský ◽  
Jiří Skřivan
Keyword(s):  
Speech Perception ◽  
Speech Production ◽  
Cochlear Implantation ◽  
Auditory Perception ◽  
Public Key ◽  
Spearman Correlation ◽  
New Classification ◽  
Statistical Software ◽  
The Public ◽  
Spearman Correlation Test

Summary Introduction: The aim of this study was to create a new classification scale for the evaluation of speech in patients after cochlear implantation. Our newly created Motol Speech Scale (MSS) independently evaluates both speech components – perception and expression. Material and methods: We processed a set of 416 cochlear implant users. It was evaluated patients’ auditory perception level and speech status according to the internationally used Nottingham scale – Categories of Auditory Performation (CAP) and, at the same time, according to the Motol Speech Scale (MSS). The data obtained on both scales were compared and evaluated using the GraphPad statistical software. Results: The Spearman correlation test demonstrated the existence of a positive correlation between the CAP and MSS scales. Conclusion: Our newly created MSS scale is a suitable tool for classifying speech after cochlear implantation. It is understandable for CI users, parents, professionals, and the public. Key words cochlear implantation – speech perception – speech production – classification scale

The Need for a Broad-Based Model of Phonological Disorders

1992 ◽  
Vol 23 (3) ◽  
pp. 261-268 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alan G. Kamhi
Keyword(s):  
Speech Production ◽  
Phonological Disorders ◽  
Production Processes ◽  
Assessment And Treatment ◽  
Speech Delays ◽  
Explanatory Adequacy ◽  
State Of Affairs ◽  
Assessment Procedures ◽  
Treatment Procedures

My response to Fey’s article (1985; reprinted 1992, this issue) focuses on the confusion caused by the application of simplistic phonological definitions and models to the assessment and treatment of children with speech delays. In addition to having no explanatory adequacy, such definitions/models lead either to assessment and treatment procedures that are similarly focused or to procedures that have no clear logical ties to the models with which they supposedly are linked. Narrowly focused models and definitions also usually include no mention of speech production processes. Bemoaning this state of affairs, I attempt to show why it is important for clinicians to embrace broad-based models of phonological disorders that have some explanatory value. Such models are consistent with assessment procedures that are comprehensive in nature and treatment procedures that focus on linguistic, as well as motoric, aspects of speech.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document