scholarly journals Responses to Auditory Feedback Manipulations in Speech May Be Affected by Previous Exposure to Auditory Errors

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-13
Author(s):  
Caroline A. Niziolek ◽  
Benjamin Parrell
Keyword(s):  
Auditory Feedback ◽  
Sensory Feedback ◽  
Exposure Phase ◽  
Compensatory Response ◽  
Initial Exposure ◽  
Subsequent Test ◽  
Speech Output ◽  
Feedback Compensation ◽  
Monosyllabic Words ◽  
Post Hoc

Purpose Speakers use auditory feedback to guide their speech output, although individuals differ in the magnitude of their compensatory response to perceived errors in feedback. Little is known about the factors that contribute to the compensatory response or how fixed or flexible they are within an individual. Here, we test whether manipulating the perceived reliability of auditory feedback modulates speakers' compensation to auditory perturbations, as predicted by optimal models of sensorimotor control. Method Forty participants produced monosyllabic words in two separate sessions, which differed in the auditory feedback given during an initial exposure phase. In the veridical session exposure phase, feedback was normal. In the noisy session exposure phase, small, random formant perturbations were applied, reducing reliability of auditory feedback. In each session, a subsequent test phase introduced larger unpredictable formant perturbations. We assessed whether the magnitude of within-trial compensation for these larger perturbations differed across the two sessions. Results Compensatory responses to downward (though not upward) formant perturbations were larger in the veridical session than the noisy session. However, in post hoc testing, we found the magnitude of this effect is highly dependent on the choice of analysis procedures. Compensation magnitude was not predicted by other production measures, such as formant variability, and was not reliably correlated across sessions. Conclusions Our results, though mixed, provide tentative support that the feedback control system monitors the reliability of sensory feedback. These results must be interpreted cautiously given the potentially limited stability of auditory feedback compensation measures across analysis choices and across sessions. Supplemental Material https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.14167136

Repetition Enhances the Musicality of Randomly Generated Tone Sequences

2016 ◽  
Vol 33 (4) ◽  
pp. 509-514 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elizabeth Hellmuth Margulis ◽  
Rhimmon Simchy-Gross
Keyword(s):  
Effect Size ◽  
Large Body ◽  
Test Phase ◽  
Exposure Phase ◽  
Music Training ◽  
Initial Exposure ◽  
Random Sequences ◽  
Aesthetic Experiences ◽  
Subsequent Test

This study investigated the role of repetition on listener response. It tested the hypothesis that repetition, in the form of looping during an exposure phase, would make random sequences of tones sound more musical when rated later during a test phase. In Experiment 1, participants without special music training rated the musicality of random sequences of tones on a Likert-like scale from 1 to 7. Experiment 2 used the highest and lowest rated sequences as stimuli. In an initial exposure phase, participants heard half these sequences presented six times in a loop, and half of them presented only once. In a subsequent test phase, they rated the musicality of each sequence. Sequences that had been repeated were rated as more musical, regardless of whether they had received a high or low musicality rating in Experiment 1, but the effect size was small. These results, although limited in some respects, support a large body of literature pointing to the importance of repetition in aesthetic experiences of music.

scholarly journals Spontaneous variability predicts adaptive motor response in vocal pitch control

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ryosuke O. Tachibana ◽  
Mingdi Xu ◽  
Ryu-ichiro Hashimoto ◽  
Fumitaka Homae ◽  
Kazuo Okanoya
Keyword(s):  
Nervous System ◽  
Adaptive Control ◽  
Auditory Feedback ◽  
Animal Studies ◽  
Sensory Feedback ◽  
Slow Component ◽  
Motor Fluctuation ◽  
Compensatory Response ◽  
Motor Variability ◽  
Compensatory Responses

AbstractOur motor system uses sensory feedback to keep behavioral performance in desired status. From this view, motor fluctuation is not simply ‘noise’ inevitably caused in the nervous system, but should provide a role in generating variations to explore better outcomes via their sensory feedback. Vocal control system offers a good model to investigate such adaptive sensory-motor interactions. The pitch, or fundamental frequency (FF), of voice is adaptively regulated by hearing its auditory feedback to compensate FF deviations. Animal studies, particularly for songbirds, have demonstrated that the variability in vocal features contributes to the adaptive control, although the same issue in human vocalizations has remained unclear. Here, we tested whether and how the motor variability contributes to adaptive control of vocal FF in humans. We measured the amount of compensatory vocal responses against FF shifts in the auditory feedback, and quantified the motor variability as amplitudes of spontaneous FF fluctuations during no shift vocalizations. The result showed a positive correlation between the ratio of compensation and the spontaneous vocal variability. Further analysis indicated that this correlation was due to slowly fluctuating components (<5 Hz) of the variability, but not fast fluctuations (6-30 Hz), which is likely to reflect controllability from the central nervous system. Moreover, the compensatory responses consisted of the same frequency range with the slow component in the spontaneous variability. These findings consistently demonstrated that the spontaneous motor variability predicts the adaptive control in vocal FF, supporting the motor exploration hypothesis.Significance statementWe regulate our own vocalization by hearing own voice. This fact is typically observed as canceling-out (compensatory) responses in vocalized pitch when artificial pitch shifts were induced in the auditory feedback of own voice. Interestingly, the amount of such compensation widely ranges among talkers from perfect cancellation to almost nothing. Here we demonstrated that participants who spontaneously exhibited larger fluctuations showed greater amounts of the compensation against feedbacked pitch shifts. Our in-depth analyses showed that slowly fluctuating components in spontaneous pitch variability are specifically correlated with the compensation ratios, and was shared in the compensatory response as a dominant component. These findings support the idea that such variability contributes to generating motor explorations to find better outcomes in motor controls.

scholarly journals Compensatory Responses to Formant Perturbations Proportionally Decrease as Perturbations Increase

2020 ◽  
Vol 63 (10) ◽  
pp. 3392-3407
Author(s):  
Ayoub Daliri ◽  
Sara-Ching Chao ◽  
Lacee C. Fitzgerald
Keyword(s):  
Auditory Feedback ◽  
Error Evaluation ◽  
Compensatory Responses ◽  
Speech Output ◽  
Different Types ◽  
Monosyllabic Words ◽  
Second Formant ◽  
Perturbation Magnitude ◽  
The Brain

Purpose We continuously monitor our speech output to detect potential errors in our productions. When we encounter errors, we rapidly change our speech output to compensate for the errors. However, it remains unclear whether we adjust the magnitude of our compensatory responses based on the characteristics of errors. Method Participants ( N = 30 adults) produced monosyllabic words containing /ɛ/ (/hɛp/, /hɛd/, /hɛk/) while receiving perturbed or unperturbed auditory feedback. In the perturbed trials, we applied two different types of formant perturbations: (a) the F1 shift, in which the first formant of /ɛ/ was increased, and (b) the F1–F2 shift, in which the first formant was increased and the second formant was decreased to make a participant's /ɛ/ sound like his or her /æ/. In each perturbation condition, we applied three participant-specific perturbation magnitudes (0.5, 1.0, and 1.5 ɛ–æ distance). Results Compensatory responses to perturbations with the magnitude of 1.5 ɛ–æ were proportionally smaller than responses to perturbation magnitudes of 0.5 ɛ–æ. Responses to the F1–F2 shift were larger than responses to the F1 shift regardless of the perturbation magnitude. Additionally, compensatory responses for /hɛd/ were smaller than responses for /hɛp/ and /hɛk/. Conclusions Overall, these results suggest that the brain uses its error evaluation to determine the extent of compensatory responses. The brain may also consider categorical errors and phonemic environments (e.g., articulatory configurations of the following phoneme) to determine the magnitude of its compensatory responses to auditory errors.

Influence of Altered Auditory Feedback on Oral–Nasal Balance in Speakers of Brazilian Portuguese

2019 ◽  
Vol 62 (10) ◽  
pp. 3752-3762
Author(s):  
Gillian de Boer ◽  
Viviane Marino ◽  
Larissa Berti ◽  
Eliana Fabron ◽  
Evelyn Alves Spazzapan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Auditory Feedback ◽  
Repeated Measures ◽  
Brazilian Portuguese ◽  
Feedback Condition ◽  
Compensatory Response ◽  
Repeated Measures Analysis ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Vowel Nasalization ◽  
Post Hoc

Purpose This study explored the role of auditory feedback in the regulation of oral–nasal balance in speakers of Brazilian Portuguese. Method Twenty typical speakers of Brazilian Portuguese (10 male, 10 female) wore a Nasometer headset and headphones while continuously repeating stimuli with oral and nasal sounds. Oral–nasal balance was quantified with nasalance scores. The signals from 2 additional oral and nasal microphones were played back to the participants through the headphones. The relative loudness of the nasal channel in the mix was gradually changed, so that the speakers heard themselves as more or less nasal. Results A repeated-measures analysis of variance of the mean nasalance scores of the stimuli at baseline, minimum, and maximum nasal feedback conditions demonstrated significant effects of nasal feedback condition ( p < .0001) and stimuli ( p < .0001). Post hoc analyses demonstrated that the mean nasalance scores were lowest for the maximum nasal feedback condition. The scores of the minimum nasal feedback condition were significantly higher than 2 of 3 baseline feedback conditions. The speaking amplitude of the participants did not change between the nasal feedback conditions. Conclusions Increased nasal signal level feedback led to a compensatory adjustment in the opposite direction, confirming that oral–nasal balance is regulated by auditory feedback. However, reduced nasal signal level feedback resulted in a compensatory response that was lower in magnitude. This suggests that, even in Brazilian Portuguese, a language with phonetic and phonological vowel nasalization, decreased nasality was not perceived as critically as increased nasality by the speakers.

Influence of Altered Auditory Feedback on Oral–Nasal Balance in Speech

2017 ◽  
Vol 60 (11) ◽  
pp. 3135-3143 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gillian de Boer ◽  
Tim Bressmann
Keyword(s):  
Auditory Feedback ◽  
Repeated Measures ◽  
Feedback Condition ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Compensatory Response ◽  
Amplitude Control ◽  
Stimulus Sentence ◽  
Repeated Measures Analysis ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Post Hoc

Purpose This study explored the role of auditory feedback in the regulation of oral–nasal balance in speech. Method Twenty typical female speakers wore a Nasometer 6450 (KayPentax) headset and headphones while continuously repeating a sentence with oral and nasal sounds. Oral–nasal balance was quantified with nasalance scores. The signals from 2 additional oral and nasal microphones were played back to the participants through the headphones. The relative loudness of the nasal channel in the mix was gradually changed so that the speakers heard themselves as more or less nasal. An additional amplitude control group of 9 female speakers completed the same task while hearing themselves louder or softer in the headphones. Results A repeated-measures analysis of variance of the mean nasalance scores of the stimulus sentence at baseline, minimum, and maximum nasal feedback conditions demonstrated a significant effect of the nasal feedback condition. Post hoc analyses found that the mean nasalance scores were lowest for the maximum nasal feedback condition. The scores of the minimum nasal feedback condition were significantly higher than 2 of the 3 baseline feedback conditions. The amplitude control group did not show any effects of volume changes on nasalance scores. Conclusions Increased nasal feedback led to a compensatory adjustment in the opposite direction, confirming that oral–nasal balance is regulated by auditory feedback. However, a lack of nasal feedback did not lead to a consistent compensatory response of similar magnitude.

scholarly journals Shared mechanisms of auditory and non-auditory vocal learning in the songbird brain

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
James McGregor ◽  
Abigail Grassler ◽  
Paul I. Jaffe ◽  
Amanda Louise Jacob ◽  
Michael Brainard ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Reinforcement Learning ◽  
Basal Ganglia ◽  
General Principle ◽  
Auditory Feedback ◽  
Sensory Feedback ◽  
Vocal Learning ◽  
Neural Systems ◽  
Auditory Information ◽  
Vocal Plasticity

Songbirds and humans share the ability to adaptively modify their vocalizations based on sensory feedback. Prior studies have focused primarily on the role that auditory feedback plays in shaping vocal output throughout life. In contrast, it is unclear whether and how non-auditory information drives vocal plasticity. Here, we first used a reinforcement learning paradigm to establish that non-auditory feedback can drive vocal learning in adult songbirds. We then assessed the role of a songbird basal ganglia-thalamocortical pathway critical to auditory vocal learning in this novel form of vocal plasticity. We found that both this circuit and its dopaminergic inputs are necessary for non-auditory vocal learning, demonstrating that this pathway is not specialized exclusively for auditory-driven vocal learning. The ability of this circuit to use both auditory and non-auditory information to guide vocal learning may reflect a general principle for the neural systems that support vocal plasticity across species.

Interaction of Sensory Feedback: A Child-Adult Comparison of Oral Sensory and Temporal Articulatory Function

1981 ◽  
Vol 53 (3) ◽  
pp. 979-988 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael A. Crary ◽  
Donald J. Fucci ◽  
Zinny S. Bond
Keyword(s):  
Speech Production ◽  
Topical Application ◽  
Auditory Feedback ◽  
Sensory Feedback ◽  
Sensory Thresholds ◽  
Auditory Masking ◽  
Feedback Systems ◽  
Additional Information ◽  
Age Related ◽  
Oral Sensory

Recent studies have demonstrated a systematic increase in lingual sensory thresholds and a temporal articulatory reorganization in subjects speaking under exposure to auditory masking. These data suggest that auditory and lingual sensory feedback systems exist in a balanced interaction specific to the oral articulations involved in speech production. The present study attempted to gain additional information on this proposed interaction. Lingual sensory and temporal articulatory measurements were obtained from 10 adults' and 10 children under each of four feedback conditions: (1) normal feedback, (2) exposure to binaural auditory masking during speech, (3) topical application of anesthesia to the lingual dorsum prior to speech, and (4) combined masking and anesthesia. Analysis indicated that children had lower lingual sensory thresholds than adults in all conditions and that they were more susceptible to the disruption of auditory feedback. Also, measurements of durations of vowels indicated no age-related differences with durations in both groups increasing when auditory feedback was impaired.

Interaction between Auditory and Oral Sensory Feedback in Speech Regulation

1977 ◽  
Vol 45 (1) ◽  
pp. 123-129 ◽  
Author(s):  
Donald Fucci ◽  
Michael A. Crary ◽  
Joseph A. Warren ◽  
Z. S. Bond
Keyword(s):  
Speech Production ◽  
Auditory Feedback ◽  
Sensory Feedback ◽  
Temporal Changes ◽  
Speech Sounds ◽  
Auditory Masking ◽  
Vibrotactile Thresholds ◽  
Oral Sensory ◽  
Before And After ◽  
Feedback Modalities

To investigate the interaction between the auditory and oral sensory feedback modalities during speech production lingual vibrotactile thresholds were obtained from subjects in the following conditions: (1) before and after speech production with normal auditory feedback, (2) before and after speech production under exposure to auditory masking, and (3) before and after exposure to auditory masking without performing speech tasks. In addition duration measurements were obtained for selected speech sounds to investigate temporal changes in the articulatory patterns of subjects in the various conditions. Lingual sensory decreases and temporal reorganization were observed only in subjects speaking under auditory masking. These data suggest a balanced interaction between auditory and oral sensory feedback modalities which, when disturbed, results in non-phonemic change in speech production.

Visually and Auditorily Paced Keytapping Performance During Synchronous, Decreased, and Delayed Auditory and Visual Feedback

1967 ◽  
Vol 10 (4) ◽  
pp. 865-875 ◽  
Author(s):  
Raymond S. Karlovich ◽  
James T. Graham
Keyword(s):  
Visual Feedback ◽  
Auditory Feedback ◽  
Motor Performance ◽  
Sensory Feedback ◽  
Visual Stimuli ◽  
Delayed Auditory Feedback ◽  
The Moment ◽  
Delayed Visual Feedback ◽  
Female Subjects

Twenty female subjects tapped on a tapping key to programmed visual pacing stimuli under synchronous auditory feedback, delayed auditory feedback, and decreased sensory feedback conditions and also to programmed auditory pacing stimuli under synchronous visual feedback, delayed visual feedback, and decreased sensory feedback conditions. Cross-modality matching procedures were employed to equate the perceptual magnitudes of the auditory and visual stimuli. Pattern duration and tapping key displacement variables were evaluated and it was noted that the relative perceptual magnitudes between pacing and feedback stimuli are important aspects determining the degree of alteration in keytapping motor performance under delayed sensory feedback. The data also indicated that increases in the intensity of tapping observed under delayed sensory feedback conditions were not due to the temporal distortion of the feedback but possibly to an absence of feedback at the moment of tapping.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document