Noninvasive neurostimulation of left ventral motor cortex enhances sensorimotor adaptation in speech production

On the interplay between speech perception and production: insights from research and theories

The study of spoken communication has long been entrenched in a debate surrounding the interdependence of speech production and perception. This mini review summarizes findings from prior studies to elucidate the reciprocal relationships between speech production and perception. We also discuss key theoretical perspectives relevant to speech perception-production loop, including hyper-articulation and hypo-articulation (H&H) theory, speech motor theory, direct realism theory, articulatory phonology, the Directions into Velocities of Articulators (DIVA) and Gradient Order DIVA (GODIVA) models, and predictive coding. Building on prior findings, we propose a revised auditory-motor integration model of speech and provide insights for future research in speech perception and production, focusing on the effects of impaired peripheral auditory systems.

Test-Retest Reliability of Behavioral Assays of Feedforward and Feedback Auditory-Motor Control of Voice and Articulation

PURPOSE

Behavioral assays of feedforward and feedback auditory-motor control of voice and articulation frequently are used to make inferences about underlying neural mechanisms and to study speech development and disorders. However, no studies have examined the test-retest reliability of such measures, which is critical for rigorous study of auditory-motor control. Thus, the purpose of the present study was to assess the reliability of assays of feedforward and feedback control in voice versus articulation domains.

METHOD

Twenty-eight participants (14 cisgender women, 12 cisgender men, one transgender man, one transmasculine/nonbinary) who denied any history of speech, hearing, or neurological impairment were measured for responses to predictable versus unexpected auditory feedback perturbations of vocal (fundamental frequency, fo) and articulatory (first formant, F1) acoustic parameters twice, with 3-6 weeks between sessions. Reliability was measured with intraclass correlations.

RESULTS

Opposite patterns of reliability were observed for fo and F1; fo reflexive responses showed good reliability and fo adaptive responses showed poor reliability, whereas F1 reflexive responses showed poor reliability and F1 adaptive responses showed moderate reliability. However, a criterion-referenced categorical measurement of fo adaptive responses as typical versus atypical showed substantial test-retest agreement.

CONCLUSIONS

Individual responses to some behavioral assays of auditory-motor control of speech should be interpreted with caution, which has implications for several fields of research. Additional research is needed to establish reliable criterion-referenced measures of F1 adaptive responses as well as fo and F1 reflexive responses. Furthermore, the opposite patterns of test-retest reliability observed for voice versus articulation add to growing evidence for differences in underlying neural control mechanisms.

Do Not Cut Off Your Tail: A Mega-Analysis of Responses to Auditory Perturbation Experiments

PURPOSE

The practice of removing "following" responses from speech perturbation analyses is increasingly common, despite no clear evidence as to whether these responses represent a unique response type. This study aimed to determine if the distribution of responses to auditory perturbation paradigms represents a bimodal distribution, consisting of two distinct response types, or a unimodal distribution.

METHOD

This mega-analysis pooled data from 22 previous studies to examine the distribution and magnitude of responses to auditory perturbations across four tasks: adaptive pitch, adaptive formant, reflexive pitch, and reflexive formant. Data included at least 150 unique participants for each task, with studies comprising younger adult, older adult, and Parkinson's disease populations. A Silverman's unimodality test followed by a smoothed bootstrap resampling technique was performed for each task to evaluate the number of modes in each distribution. Wilcoxon signed-ranks tests were also performed for each distribution to confirm significant compensation in response to the perturbation.

RESULTS

Modality analyses were not significant (p > .05) for any group or task, indicating unimodal distributions. Our analyses also confirmed compensatory reflexive responses to pitch and formant perturbations across all groups, as well as adaptive responses to sustained formant perturbations. However, analyses of sustained pitch perturbations only revealed evidence of adaptation in studies with younger adults.

CONCLUSION

The demonstration of a clear unimodal distribution across all tasks suggests that following responses do not represent a distinct response pattern, but rather the tail of a unimodal distribution.

SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL

https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.24282676.

Mechanisms of sensorimotor adaptation in a hierarchical state feedback control model of speech

Upon perceiving sensory errors during movements, the human sensorimotor system updates future movements to compensate for the errors, a phenomenon called sensorimotor adaptation. One component of this adaptation is thought to be driven by sensory prediction errors-discrepancies between predicted and actual sensory feedback. However, the mechanisms by which prediction errors drive adaptation remain unclear. Here, auditory prediction error-based mechanisms involved in speech auditory-motor adaptation were examined via the feedback aware control of tasks in speech (FACTS) model. Consistent with theoretical perspectives in both non-speech and speech motor control, the hierarchical architecture of FACTS relies on both the higher-level task (vocal tract constrictions) as well as lower-level articulatory state representations. Importantly, FACTS also computes sensory prediction errors as a part of its state feedback control mechanism, a well-established framework in the field of motor control. We explored potential adaptation mechanisms and found that adaptive behavior was present only when prediction errors updated the articulatory-to-task state transformation. In contrast, designs in which prediction errors updated forward sensory prediction models alone did not generate adaptation. Thus, FACTS demonstrated that 1) prediction errors can drive adaptation through task-level updates, and 2) adaptation is likely driven by updates to task-level control rather than (only) to forward predictive models. Additionally, simulating adaptation with FACTS generated a number of important hypotheses regarding previously reported phenomena such as identifying the source(s) of incomplete adaptation and driving factor(s) for changes in the second formant frequency during adaptation to the first formant perturbation. The proposed model design paves the way for a hierarchical state feedback control framework to be examined in the context of sensorimotor adaptation in both speech and non-speech effector systems.

Transcranial direct current stimulation over left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex facilitates auditory-motor integration for vocal pitch regulation

Background

A growing body of literature has implicated the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) in the online monitoring of vocal production through auditory feedback. Specifically, disruption of or damage to the left DLPFC leads to exaggerated compensatory vocal responses to altered auditory feedback. It is conceivable that enhancing the cortical excitability of the left DLPFC may produce inhibitory influences on vocal feedback control by reducing vocal compensations.

Methods

We used anodal transcranial direct current stimulation (a-tDCS) to modulate cortical excitability of the left DLPFC and examined its effects on auditory-motor integration for vocal pitch regulation. Seventeen healthy young adults vocalized vowel sounds while hearing their voice pseudo-randomly pitch-shifted by ±50 or ±200 cents, either during (online) or after (offline) receiving active or sham a-tDCS over the left DLPFC.

Results

Active a-tDCS over the left DLPFC led to significantly smaller peak magnitudes and shorter peak times of vocal compensations for pitch perturbations than sham stimulation. In addition, this effect was consistent regardless of the timing of a-tDCS (online or offline stimulation) and the size and direction of the pitch perturbation.

Conclusion

These findings provide the first causal evidence that a-tDCS over the left DLPFC can facilitate auditory-motor integration for compensatory adjustment to errors in vocal output. Reduced and accelerated vocal compensations caused by a-tDCS over left DLPFC support the hypothesis of a top-down neural mechanism that exerts inhibitory control over vocal motor behavior through auditory feedback.

Continuous theta burst stimulation over left and right supramarginal gyri demonstrates their involvement in auditory feedback control of vocal production

The supramarginal gyrus (SMG) has been implicated in auditory-motor integration for vocal production. However, whether the SMG is bilaterally or unilaterally involved in auditory feedback control of vocal production in a causal manner remains unclear. The present event-related potential (ERP) study investigated the causal roles of the left and right SMG to auditory-vocal integration using neuronavigated continuous theta burst stimulation (c-TBS). Twenty-four young adults produced sustained vowel phonations and heard their voice unexpectedly pitch-shifted by ±200 cents after receiving active or sham c-TBS over the left or right SMG. As compared to sham stimulation, c-TBS over the left or right SMG led to significantly smaller vocal compensations for pitch perturbations that were accompanied by smaller cortical P2 responses. Moreover, no significant differences were found in the vocal and ERP responses when comparing active c-TBS over the left vs. right SMG. These findings provide neurobehavioral evidence for a causal influence of both the left and right SMG on auditory feedback control of vocal production. Decreased vocal compensations paralleled by reduced P2 responses following c-TBS over the bilateral SMG support their roles for auditory-motor transformation in a bottom-up manner: receiving auditory feedback information and mediating vocal compensations for feedback errors.

tDCS modulates speech perception and production in second language learners

Accurate identification and pronunciation of nonnative speech sounds can be particularly challenging for adult language learners. The current study tested the effects of a brief musical training combined with transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) on speech perception and production in a second language (L2). The sample comprised 36 native Hebrew speakers, aged 18-38, who studied English as L2 in a formal setting and had little musical training. Training encompassed musical perception tasks with feedback (i.e., timbre, duration, and tonal memory) and concurrent tDCS applied over the left posterior auditory-related cortex (including posterior superior temporal gyrus and planum temporale). Participants were randomly assigned to anodal or sham stimulation. Musical perception, L2 speech perception (measured by a categorical AXB discrimination task) and speech production (measured by a speech imitation task) were tested before and after training. There were no tDCS-dependent effects on musical perception post-training. However, only participants who received active stimulation showed increased accuracy of L2 phoneme discrimination and greater change in the acoustic properties of L2 speech sound production (i.e., second formant frequency in vowels and center of gravity in consonants). The results of this study suggest neuromodulation can facilitate the processing of nonnative speech sounds in adult learners.

Disruption of speech motor adaptation with repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation of the articulatory representation in primary motor cortex

When auditory feedback perturbation is introduced in a predictable way over a number of utterances, speakers learn to compensate by adjusting their own productions, a process known as sensorimotor adaptation. Despite multiple lines of evidence indicating the role of primary motor cortex (M1) in motor learning and memory, whether M1 causally contributes to sensorimotor adaptation in the speech domain remains unclear. Here, we aimed to assay whether temporary disruption of the articulatory representation in left M1 by repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) impairs speech adaptation. To induce sensorimotor adaptation, the frequencies of first formants (F1) were shifted up and played back to participants when they produced “head”, “bed”, and “dead” repeatedly (the learning phase). A low-frequency rTMS train (.6 Hz, subthreshold, 12 min) over either the tongue or the hand representation of M1 (between-subjects design) was applied before participants experienced altered auditory feedback in the learning phase. We found that the group who received rTMS over the hand representation showed the expected compensatory response for the upwards shift in F1 by significantly reducing F1 and increasing the second formant (F2) frequencies in their productions. In contrast, these expected compensatory changes in both F1 and F2 did not occur in the group that received rTMS over the tongue representation. Critically, rTMS (subthreshold) over the tongue representation did not affect vowel production, which was unchanged from baseline. These results provide direct evidence that the articulatory representation in left M1 causally contributes to sensorimotor learning in speech. Furthermore, these results also suggest that M1 is critical to the network supporting a more global adaptation that aims to move the altered speech production closer to a learnt pattern of speech production used to produce another vowel.

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

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.