scholarly journals Reality Monitoring and Feedback Control of Speech Production Are Related Through Self-Agency

2018 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karuna Subramaniam ◽  
Hardik Kothare ◽  
Danielle Mizuiri ◽  
Srikantan S. Nagarajan ◽  
John F. Houde
Keyword(s):  
Feedback Control ◽  
Speech Production ◽  
Reality Monitoring

A cross-language study on feedforward and feedback control of voice intensity in Chinese–English bilinguals

2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (4) ◽  
pp. 771-795
Author(s):  
Xiao Cai ◽  
Yulong Yin ◽  
Qingfang Zhang
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Feedback Control ◽  
Language Learning ◽  
Speech Production ◽  
Feedforward Control ◽  
Feedback Systems ◽  
Masking Noise ◽  
L1 And L2 ◽  
Relative Weighting ◽  
L2 Speech Production

AbstractSpeech production requires the combined efforts of feedforward and feedback control, but it remains unclear whether the relative weighting of feedforward and feedback control is organized differently between the first language (L1) and the second language (L2). In the present study, a group of Chinese–English bilinguals named pictures in their L1 and L2, while being exposed to multitalker noise. Experiment 1 compared feedforward control between L1 and L2 speech production by examining intensity increases in response to a masking noise (90 dB SPL). Experiment 2 compared feedback control between L1 and L2 speech production by examining intensity increases in response to a weak (30 dB SPL) or strong noise (60 dB SPL). We also examined a potential relationship between L2 fluency and the relative weighting of feedforward and feedback systems. The results indicated that L2 speech production relies less on feedforward control relative to L1, exhibiting attenuated Lombard effects to the masking noise. In contrast, L2 speech production relies more on feedback control than L1, producing larger Lombard effects to the weak and strong noise. The relative weighting of feedforward and feedback control is dynamically changed as second language learning progresses.

Articulation and Stress/Juncture Production Under Oral Anesthetization and Masking

1971 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 271-282 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sylvia A. Gammon ◽  
Philip J. Smith ◽  
Raymond G. Daniloff ◽  
Chin W. Kim
Keyword(s):  
Feedback Control ◽  
Oral Cavity ◽  
White Noise ◽  
Speech Production ◽  
Local Anesthesia ◽  
The Other ◽  
Control Mechanisms ◽  
Combined Stress ◽  
Noise Masking ◽  
High Degree

Eight subjects, half of them naive and the other half aware of the purpose of the experiment, spoke 30 pairs of sentences involving the production of intricate stress/juncture patterns along with a passage containing all major consonant phonemes in English in various intraword positions. All subjects spoke all materials under: (1) normal conditions, (2) 110 dB re: 0.0002 ubar white noise masking, (3) extensive local anesthesia of the oral cavity, and (4) masking and anesthesia combined. Stress and juncture patterns were correctly produced despite all feedback disruption, and there was no difference between naive and aware subjects. Noise masking produced a decline in speech quality and a disruption of normal rhythm, both of which were even more seriously affected by anesthesia and anesthesia plus masking. There were no significant vowel misarticulations under any condition, but there was nearly a 20% rate of consonant misartiqulation under anesthesia and anesthesia and noise. Mis-articulation was most severe for fricatives and affricates in the labial and alveolar regions, presumably because these productions demand a high degree of precision of articulate shape and location and hence, intact feedback. Results are discussed in terms of feedback-control mechanisms for speech production.

scholarly journals Differential effects of cerebellar degeneration on feedforward versus feedback control across speech and reaching movements

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Benjamin Parrell ◽  
Hyosub Kim ◽  
Assaf Breska ◽  
Arohi Saxena ◽  
Rich Ivry
Keyword(s):  
Feedback Control ◽  
Speech Production ◽  
Neural Circuit ◽  
Feedforward Control ◽  
Cerebellar Degeneration ◽  
Adaptive Responses ◽  
Compensatory Response ◽  
Domain Specific ◽  
Specific Manner ◽  
Online Corrections

AbstractErrors that result from a mismatch between predicted movement outcomes and sensory afference are used to correct ongoing movements through feedback control and to adapt feedforward control of future movements. The cerebellum has been identified as a critical part of the neural circuit underlying implicit adaptation across a wide variety of movements (reaching, gait, eye movements, and speech). The contribution of this structure to feedback control is less well understood: although it has recently been shown in the speech domain that individuals with cerebellar degeneration produce even larger online corrections for sensory perturbations than control participants, similar behavior has not been observed in other motor domains. Currently, comparisons across domains are limited by different population samples and potential ceiling effects in existing tasks. To assess the relationship between changes in feedforward and feedback control associated with cerebellar degeneration across motor domains, we evaluated adaptive (feedforward) and compensatory (feedback) responses to sensory perturbations in reaching and speech production in individuals with cerebellar degeneration and neurobiologically healthy controls. As expected, the cerebellar group demonstrated impaired adaptation in both reaching and speech. In contrast, the groups did not differ in their compensatory response in either domain. Moreover, compensatory and adaptive responses in the cerebellar group were not correlated within or across motor domains. Together, these results point to a general impairment in feedforward control with spared feedback control in cerebellar degeneration. However, the magnitude of feedforward impairments and potential changes in feedback-based control manifest in a domain-specific manner across individuals.Significance StatementThe cerebellum contributes to feedforward updating of movement in response to sensory errors, but its role in feedback control is less understood. Here, we tested individuals with cerebellar degeneration (CD), using sensory perturbations to assess adaptation of feedforward control and feedback gains during reaching and speech production tasks. The results confirmed that CD leads to reduced adaption in both domains. However, feedback gains were unaffected by CD in either domain. Interestingly, measures of feedforward and feedback control were not correlated across individuals within or across motor domains. Together, these results indicate a general impairment in feedforward control with spared feedback control in CD. However, the magnitude of feedforward impairments manifests in a domain-specific manner across individuals.

scholarly journals Cortical network underlying speech production during delayed auditory feedback

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Muge Ozker ◽  
Werner Doyle ◽  
Orrin Devinsky ◽  
Adeen Flinker
Keyword(s):  
Feedback Control ◽  
Speech Production ◽  
Auditory Feedback ◽  
Speech Rate ◽  
Temporal Cortex ◽  
Early Time ◽  
Precentral Gyrus ◽  
Delayed Auditory Feedback ◽  
Human Speech ◽  
Auditory Feedback Control

AbstractAccurate and fluent production of speech strongly depends on hearing oneself which allows for the detection and correction of vocalization errors in real-time. When auditory feedback is disrupted with a time delay (e.g. echo on a conference call), it causes slowed and stutter-like speech in humans. Impaired speech motor control during delayed auditory feedback is implicated in various neurological disorders ranging from stuttering to aphasia, however the underlying neural mechanisms are poorly understood. Here, we investigated auditory feedback control in human speech by obtaining electrocorticographic recordings from neurosurgical subjects performing a delayed auditory feedback (DAF) task. We observed a significant increase in neural activity in auditory sites that scaled with the duration of feedback delay and correlated with response suppression during normal speech, providing direct evidence for a shared mechanism between sensitivity to altered feedback and speech-induced auditory suppression in humans. Furthermore, we find that when subjects robustly slowed down their speech rate to compensate for the delay, the dorsal division of the precentral gyrus was preferentially recruited to support articulation during an early time frame. This recruitment was accompanied by response enhancement across a large speech network commencing in temporal cortex and then engaging frontal and parietal sites. Our results highlight the critical components of the human speech network that support auditory feedback control of speech production and the temporal evolution of their recruitment.

Online Control of Voice Intensity in Late Bilinguals' First and Second Language Speech Production: Evidence From Unexpected and Brief Noise Masking

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-19
Author(s):  
Xiao Cai ◽  
Yulong Yin ◽  
Qingfang Zhang
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Feedback Control ◽  
Speech Production ◽  
Auditory Feedback ◽  
Speech Fluency ◽  
Weak Noise ◽  
Auditory Acuity ◽  
Auditory Feedback Control ◽  
Relative Weighting ◽  
Late Bilinguals

Purpose Speech production requires the combined efforts of feedforward control and feedback control subsystems. The primary purpose of this study is to explore whether the relative weighting of auditory feedback control is different between the first language (L1) and the second language (L2) production for late bilinguals. The authors also make an exploratory investigation into how bilinguals' speech fluency and speech perception relate to their auditory feedback control. Method Twenty Chinese–English bilinguals named Chinese or English bisyllabic words, while being exposed to 30- or 60-dB unexpected brief masking noise. Variables of language (L1 or L2) and noise condition (quiet, weak noise, or strong noise) were manipulated in the experiment. L1 and L2 speech fluency tests and an L2 perception test were also included to measure bilinguals' speech fluency and auditory acuity. Results Peak intensity analyses indicated that the intensity increases in the weak noise and strong noise conditions were larger in L2-English than L1-Chinese production. Intensity contour analysis showed that the intensity increases in both languages had an onset around 80–140 ms, a peak around 220–250 ms, and persisted till 400 ms post vocalization onset. Correlation analyses also revealed that poorer speech fluency or L2 auditory acuity was associated with larger Lombard effect. Conclusions For late bilinguals, the reliance on auditory feedback control is heavier in L2 than in L1 production. We empirically supported a relation between speech fluency and the relative weighting of auditory feedback control, and provided the first evidence for the production–perception link in L2 speech motor control.

scholarly journals Cerebellar contribution to auditory feedback control of speech production: Evidence from patients with spinocerebellar ataxia

2019 ◽  
Vol 40 (16) ◽  
pp. 4748-4758 ◽  
Author(s):  
Weifeng Li ◽  
Jiajun Zhuang ◽  
Zhiqiang Guo ◽  
Jeffery A. Jones ◽  
Zhiqin Xu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Feedback Control ◽  
Speech Production ◽  
Spinocerebellar Ataxia ◽  
Auditory Feedback ◽  
Auditory Feedback Control

A Right-Ear Effect for Auditory Feedback Control of Children’s Newly Acquired Phonemes

1978 ◽  
Vol 21 (3) ◽  
pp. 580-588 ◽  
Author(s):  
Walter H. Manning ◽  
Linda J. Louko ◽  
Vincent S. DiSalvo
Keyword(s):  
Feedback Control ◽  
Speech Production ◽  
Auditory Feedback ◽  
Auditory Processing ◽  
Closed Loop ◽  
Relative Importance ◽  
Experimental Conditions ◽  
Masking Condition ◽  
Auditory Feedback Control

To determine the relative importance of binaural, right-ear, and left-ear auditory feedback control on the correct production of newly acquired articulatory patterns in children, 40 children exhibiting misarticulations were tested under four experimental conditions. The children were individually administered a shortened version of the Deep Test of Articulation (McDonald, 1964) under (1) a no-masking condition, followed in a counterbalanced order by readministration of the Deep Test under conditions of (2) binaural masking, (3) monaural right-ear masking, and (4) monaural left-ear masking. Correct articulatory production by the children was significantly reduced under binaural and monaural right-ear masking. There was, however, no significant reduction in the children’s correct production under the condition of monaural left-ear masking. The results extend previous findings of right-ear superiority for children’s auditory processing of externally produced stimuli to the closed-loop auditory feedback control of children’s own speech production.

Assessing Ecologically Valid Methods of Auditory Feedback Measurement in Individuals With Typical Speech

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-15
Author(s):  
Nicole E. Tomassi ◽  
Hasini R. Weerathunge ◽  
Megan R. Cushman ◽  
Jason W. Bohland ◽  
Cara E. Stepp
Keyword(s):  
Feedback Control ◽  
Speech Production ◽  
Standard Method ◽  
Auditory Feedback ◽  
Online Control ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Feedback Mechanisms ◽  
Link Type ◽  
Acoustic Environments ◽  
Auditory Feedback Control

Purpose: Auditory feedback is thought to contribute to the online control of speech production. Yet, the standard method of estimating auditory feedback control (i.e., reflexive responses to auditory–motor perturbations), although sound, requires specialized instrumentation, meticulous calibration, unnatural tasks, and specific acoustic environments. The purpose of this study was to explore more ecologically valid features of speech production to determine their relationships with auditory feedback mechanisms. Method: Two previously proposed measures of within-utterance variability (centering and baseline variability) were compared with reflexive response magnitudes in 30 adults with typical speech. These three measures were estimated for both the laryngeal and articulatory subsystems of speech. Results: Regardless of the speech subsystem, neither centering nor baseline variability was shown to be related to reflexive response magnitudes. Likewise, no relationships were found between centering and baseline variability. Conclusions: Despite previous suggestions that centering and baseline variability may be related to auditory feedback mechanisms, this study did not support these assertions. However, the detection of such relationships may have required a larger degree of variability in responses, relative to that found in those with typical speech. Future research on these relationships is warranted in populations with more heterogeneous responses, such as children or clinical populations. Supplemental Material https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.17330546

scholarly journals Speech Production From a Developmental Perspective

2019 ◽  
Vol 62 (8S) ◽  
pp. 2946-2962 ◽  
Author(s):  
Melissa A. Redford
Keyword(s):  
Feedback Control ◽  
Speech Production ◽  
Developmental Stages ◽  
Developmental Process ◽  
Developmental Approach ◽  
Developmental Patterns ◽  
Adult Behavior ◽  
Working Hypothesis ◽  
Selection Of ◽  
Lexical Concept

Purpose Current approaches to speech production aim to explain adult behavior and so make assumptions that, when taken to their logical conclusion, fail to adequately account for development. This failure is problematic if adult behavior can be understood to emerge from the developmental process. This problem motivates the proposal of a developmentally sensitive theory of speech production. The working hypothesis, which structures the theory, is that feedforward representations and processes mature earlier than central feedback control processes in speech production. Method Theoretical assumptions that underpin the 2 major approaches to adult speech production are reviewed. Strengths and weaknesses are evaluated with respect to developmental patterns. A developmental approach is then pursued. The strengths of existing theories are borrowed, and the ideas are resynthesized under the working hypothesis. The speech production process is then reimagined in developmental stages, with each stage building on the previous one. Conclusion The resulting theory proposes that speech production relies on conceptually linked representations that are information-reduced holistic perceptual and motoric forms, constituting the phonological aspect of a system that is acquired with the lexicon. These forms are referred to as exemplars and schemas, respectively. When a particular exemplar and schema are activated with the selection of a particular lexical concept, their forms are used to define unique trajectories through an endogenous perceptual–motor space that guides implementation. This space is not linguistic, reflecting its origin in the prespeech period. Central feedback control over production emerges with failures in communication and the development of a self-concept.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document