EXPRESS: Don’t blame yourself: Conscious source monitoring modulates feedback control during speech production

2022 ◽  
pp. 174702182210756
Author(s):  
Matthias K. Franken ◽  
Robert J Hartsuiker ◽  
Petter Johansson ◽  
Lars Hall ◽  
Andreas Lind
Keyword(s):  
Motor Control ◽  
Auditory Feedback ◽  
Sensory Feedback ◽  
Source Monitoring ◽  
External Source ◽  
The Self ◽  
Speech Motor Control ◽  
Sensory Event ◽  
Speech Motor

Sensory feedback plays an important role in speech motor control. One of the main sources of evidence for this are studies where online auditory feedback is perturbed during ongoing speech. In motor control, it is therefore crucial to distinguish between sensory feedback and externally generated sensory events. This is called source monitoring. Previous altered feedback studies have taken non-conscious source monitoring for granted, as automatic responses to altered sensory feedback imply that the feedback changes are processed as self-caused. However, the role of conscious source monitoring is unclear. The current study investigated whether conscious source monitoring modulates responses to unexpected pitch changes in auditory feedback. During a first block, some participants spontaneously attributed the pitch shifts to themselves (self-blamers) while others attributed them to an external source (other-blamers). Before block 2, all participants were informed that the pitch shifts were experimentally induced. The self-blamers then showed a reduction in response magnitude in block 2 compared with block 1, while the other-blamers did not. This suggests that conscious source monitoring modulates responses to altered auditory feedback, such that consciously ascribing feedback to oneself leads to larger compensation responses. These results can be accounted for within the dominant comparator framework, where conscious source monitoring could modulate the gain on sensory feedback. Alternatively, the results can be naturally explained from an inferential framework, where conscious knowledge may bias the priors in a Bayesian process to determine the most likely source of a sensory event.

Don’t blame yourself: Conscious source monitoring modulates feedback control during speech production

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthias K. Franken ◽  
Robert Hartsuiker ◽  
Petter Johansson ◽  
Lars Hall ◽  
Andreas Lind
Keyword(s):  
Motor Control ◽  
Auditory Feedback ◽  
Sensory Feedback ◽  
Source Monitoring ◽  
External Source ◽  
The Self ◽  
Speech Motor Control ◽  
Sensory Event ◽  
Speech Motor

Sensory feedback plays an important role in speech motor control. One of the main sources of evidence for this are studies where online auditory feedback is perturbed during ongoing speech. In motor control, it is therefore crucial to distinguish between sensory feedback and externally generated sensory events. This is called source monitoring. Previous altered feedback studies have taken non-conscious source monitoring for granted, as automatic responses to altered sensory feedback imply that the feedback changes are processed as self-caused. However, the role of conscious source monitoring is unclear. The current study investigated whether conscious source monitoring modulates responses to unexpected pitch changes in auditory feedback. During a first block, some participants spontaneously attributed the pitch shifts to themselves (self-blamers) while others attributed them to an external source (other-blamers). Before block 2, all participants were informed that the pitch shifts were experimentally induced. The self-blamers then showed a reduction in response magnitude in block 2 compared with block 1, while the other-blamers did not. This suggests that conscious source monitoring modulates responses to altered auditory feedback, such that consciously ascribing feedback to oneself leads to larger compensation responses. These results can be accounted for within the dominant comparator framework, where conscious source monitoring could modulate the gain on sensory feedback. Alternatively, the results can be naturally explained from an inferential framework, where conscious knowledge may bias the priors in a Bayesian process to determine the most likely source of a sensory event.

scholarly journals Modeling the Role of Sensory Feedback in Speech Motor Control and Learning

2019 ◽  
Vol 62 (8S) ◽  
pp. 2963-2985 ◽  
Author(s):  
Benjamin Parrell ◽  
John Houde
Keyword(s):  
Motor Control ◽  
Motor System ◽  
Sensory Feedback ◽  
Computational Models ◽  
State Feedback Control ◽  
Speech Motor Control ◽  
Control Feedback ◽  
Motor Production ◽  
Speech Motor

Purpose While the speech motor system is sensitive to feedback perturbations, sensory feedback does not seem to be critical to speech motor production. How the speech motor system is able to be so flexible in its use of sensory feedback remains an open question. Method We draw on evidence from a variety of disciplines to summarize current understanding of the sensory systems' role in speech motor control, including both online control and motor learning. We focus particularly on computational models of speech motor control that incorporate sensory feedback, as these models provide clear encapsulations of different theories of sensory systems' function in speech production. These computational models include the well-established directions into velocities of articulators model and computational models that we have been developing in our labs based on the domain-general theory of state feedback control (feedback aware control of tasks in speech model). Results After establishing the architecture of the models, we show that both the directions into velocities of articulators and state feedback control/feedback aware control of tasks models can replicate key behaviors related to sensory feedback in the speech motor system. Although the models agree on many points, the underlying architecture of the 2 models differs in a few key ways, leading to different predictions in certain areas. We cover key disagreements between the models to show the limits of our current understanding and point toward areas where future experimental studies can resolve these questions. Conclusions Understanding the role of sensory information in the speech motor system is critical to understanding speech motor production and sensorimotor learning in healthy speakers as well as in disordered populations. Computational models, with their concrete implementations and testable predictions, are an important tool to understand this process. Comparison of different models can highlight areas of agreement and disagreement in the field and point toward future experiments to resolve important outstanding questions about the speech motor control system.

scholarly journals The Role of Sensory Feedback in Developmental Stuttering: A Review

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-27
Author(s):  
Abigail R. Bradshaw ◽  
Daniel R. Lametti ◽  
Carolyn McGettigan
Keyword(s):  
Auditory Feedback ◽  
Sensory Feedback ◽  
Neurodevelopmental Disorder ◽  
Speech Motor Control ◽  
Compensatory Strategies ◽  
Speech Control ◽  
Developmental Stuttering ◽  
Speech Motor ◽  
Lines Of Evidence

Abstract Developmental stuttering is a neurodevelopmental disorder that severely affects speech fluency. Multiple lines of evidence point to a role of sensory feedback in the disorder; this has led to a number of theories proposing different disruptions to the use of sensory feedback during speech motor control in people who stutter. The purpose of this review was to bring together evidence from studies using altered auditory feedback paradigms with people who stutter, in order to evaluate the predictions of these different theories. This review highlights converging evidence for particular patterns of differences in the responses of people who stutter to feedback perturbations. The implications for hypotheses on the nature of the disruption to sensorimotor control of speech in the disorder are discussed, with reference to neurocomputational models of speech control (predominantly, the DIVA model; Guenther et al., 2006; Tourville et al., 2008). While some consistent patterns are emerging from this evidence, it is clear that more work in this area is needed with developmental samples in particular, in order to tease apart differences related to symptom onset from those related to compensatory strategies that develop with experience of stuttering.

scholarly journals Consistency influences altered auditory feedback processing

2019 ◽  
Vol 72 (10) ◽  
pp. 2371-2379 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthias K Franken ◽  
Daniel J Acheson ◽  
James M McQueen ◽  
Peter Hagoort ◽  
Frank Eisner
Keyword(s):  
Motor Control ◽  
Speech Production ◽  
Auditory Feedback ◽  
Speech Motor Control ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Feedback Processing ◽  
Motor Commands ◽  
Consistent Condition ◽  
Consistency Effect ◽  
Speech Motor

Previous research on the effect of perturbed auditory feedback in speech production has focused on two types of responses. In the short term, speakers generate compensatory motor commands in response to unexpected perturbations. In the longer term, speakers adapt feedforward motor programmes in response to feedback perturbations, to avoid future errors. The current study investigated the relation between these two types of responses to altered auditory feedback. Specifically, it was hypothesised that consistency in previous feedback perturbations would influence whether speakers adapt their feedforward motor programmes. In an altered auditory feedback paradigm, formant perturbations were applied either across all trials (the consistent condition) or only to some trials, whereas the others remained unperturbed (the inconsistent condition). The results showed that speakers’ responses were affected by feedback consistency, with stronger speech changes in the consistent condition compared with the inconsistent condition. Current models of speech-motor control can explain this consistency effect. However, the data also suggest that compensation and adaptation are distinct processes, which are not in line with all current models.

scholarly journals Abnormal Speech Motor Control in Individuals with 16p11.2 Deletions

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carly Demopoulos ◽  
Hardik Kothare ◽  
Danielle Mizuiri ◽  
Jennifer Henderson-Sabes ◽  
Brieana Fregeau ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Motor Control ◽  
Auditory Feedback ◽  
Spectral Peak ◽  
Motor Deficits ◽  
Speech Motor Control ◽  
Sensorimotor Adaptation ◽  
Speech And Language ◽  
Vowel Production ◽  
Identity Changes ◽  
Speech Motor

AbstractSpeech and motor deficits are highly prevalent (>70%) in individuals with the 600 kb BP4-BP5 16p11.2 deletion; however, the mechanisms that drive these deficits are unclear, limiting our ability to target interventions and advance treatment. This study examined fundamental aspects of speech motor control in participants with the 16p11.2 deletion. To assess capacity for control of voice, we examined how accurately and quickly subjects changed the pitch of their voice within a trial to correct for a transient perturbation of the pitch of their auditory feedback. When compared to sibling controls, 16p11.2 deletion carriers show an over-exaggerated pitch compensation response to unpredictable mid-vocalization pitch perturbations. We also examined sensorimotor adaptation of speech by assessing how subjects learned to adapt their sustained productions of formants (speech spectral peak frequencies important for vowel identity), in response to consistent changes in their auditory feedback during vowel production. Deletion carriers show reduced sensorimotor adaptation to sustained vowel identity changes in auditory feedback. These results together suggest that 16p11.2 deletion carriers have fundamental impairments in the basic mechanisms of speech motor control and these impairments may partially explain the deficits in speech and language in these individuals.

Do We Have a “Mental Syllabary” in the Brain? An fMRI Study

Motor Control ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 34-51 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bettina Brendel ◽  
Michael Erb ◽  
Axel Riecker ◽  
Wolfgang Grodd ◽  
Hermann Ackermann ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Motor Control ◽  
Low Frequency ◽  
Frequency Effect ◽  
Speech Motor Control ◽  
Motor Execution ◽  
Syllable Frequency ◽  
Fmri Study ◽  
The Brain ◽  
Speech Motor

The present study combines functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) and reaction time (RT) measurements to further elucidate the influence of syllable frequency and complexity on speech motor control processes, i.e., overt reading of pseudowords. Tying in with a recent fMRI-study of our group we focused on the concept of a mental syllabary housing syllable sized ready-made motor plans for high- (HF), but not low-frequency (LF) syllables. The RT-analysis disclosed a frequency effect weakened by a simultaneous complexity effect for HF-syllables. In contrast, the fMRI data revealed no effect of syllable frequency, but point to an impact of syllable structure: Compared with CV-items, syllables with a complex onset (CCV) yielded higher hemodynamic activation in motor “execution” areas (left sensorimotor cortex, right inferior cerebellum), which is at least partially compatible with our previous study. We discuss the role of the syllable in speech motor control.

A Contribution to the Role of the Claustrum in Speech Motor Control Processes

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Manfred Pützer ◽  
Jean Richard Moringlane ◽  
Wolfgang Reith ◽  
Christoph M. Krick
Keyword(s):  
Motor Control ◽  
Speech Motor Control ◽  
Control Processes ◽  
Speech Motor

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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document