Vowel generalization and its relation to adaptation during perturbations of auditory feedback

Sensorimotor Adaptation to Formant-Shifted Auditory Feedback Is Predicted by Language-Specific Factors in L1 and L2 Speech Production

Auditory feedback plays an important role in the long-term updating and maintenance of speech motor control; thus, the current study explored the unresolved question of how sensorimotor adaptation is predicted by language-specific and domain-general factors in first-language (L1) and second-language (L2) production. Eighteen English-L1 speakers and 22 English-L2 speakers performed the same sensorimotor adaptation experiments and tasks, which measured language-specific and domain-general abilities. The experiment manipulated the language groups (English-L1 and English-L2) and experimental conditions (baseline, early adaptation, late adaptation, and end). Linear mixed-effects model analyses indicated that auditory acuity was significantly associated with sensorimotor adaptation in L1 and L2 speakers. Analysis of vocal responses showed that L1 speakers exhibited significant sensorimotor adaptation under the early adaptation, late adaptation, and end conditions, whereas L2 speakers exhibited significant sensorimotor adaptation only under the late adaptation condition. Furthermore, the domain-general factors of working memory and executive control were not associated with adaptation/aftereffects in either L1 or L2 production, except for the role of working memory in aftereffects in L2 production. Overall, the study empirically supported the hypothesis that sensorimotor adaptation is predicted by language-specific factors such as auditory acuity and language experience, whereas general cognitive abilities do not play a major role in this process.

How to cut the pie is no piece of cake: Toward a process-oriented approach to assessment and diagnosis of speech sound disorders

BACKGROUND

'Speech sound disorder' is an umbrella term that encompasses dysarthria, articulation disorders, childhood apraxia of speech and phonological disorders. However, differential diagnosis between these disorders is a persistent challenge in speech pathology, as many diagnostic procedures use symptom clusters instead of identifying an origin of breakdown in the speech and language system.

AIMS

This article reviews typical and disordered speech through the lens of two well-developed models of production-one focused on phonological encoding and one focused on speech motor planning. We illustrate potential breakdown locations within these models that may relate to childhood apraxia of speech and phonological disorders.

MAIN CONTRIBUTION

This paper presents an overview of an approach to conceptualisation of speech sound disorders that is grounded in current models of speech production and emphasises consideration of underlying processes. The paper also sketches a research agenda for the development of valid, reliable and clinically feasible assessment protocols for children with speech sound disorders.

CONCLUSION

The process-oriented approach outlined here is in the early stages of development but holds promise for developing a more detailed and comprehensive understanding of, and assessment protocols for speech sound disorders that go beyond broad diagnostic labels based on error analysis. Directions for future research are discussed.

WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS

What is already known on the subject Speech sound disorders (SSD) are heterogeneous, and there is agreement that some children have a phonological impairment (phonological disorders, PD) whereas others have an impairment of speech motor planning (childhood apraxia of speech, CAS). There is also recognition that speech production involves multiple processes, and several approaches to the assessment and diagnosis of SSD have been proposed. What this paper adds to existing knowledge This paper provides a more detailed conceptualisation of potential impairments in children with SSD that is grounded in current models of speech production and encourages greater consideration of underlying processes. The paper illustrates this approach and provides guidance for further development. One consequence of this perspective is the notion that broad diagnostic category labels (PD, CAS) may each comprise different subtypes or profiles depending on the processes that are affected. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work? Although the approach is in the early stages of development and no comprehensive validated set of tasks and measures is available to assess all processes, clinicians may find the conceptualisation of different underlying processes and the notion of potential subtypes within PD and CAS informative when evaluating SSD. In addition, this perspective discourages either/or thinking (PD or CAS) and instead encourages consideration of the possibility that children may have different combinations of impairments at different processing stages.

A tale of too many tasks: task fragmentation in motor learning and a call for model task paradigms

Motor learning encompasses a broad set of phenomena that requires a diverse set of experimental paradigms. However, excessive variation in tasks across studies creates fragmentation that can adversely affect the collective advancement of knowledge. Here, we show that motor learning studies tend toward extreme fragmentation in the choice of tasks, with almost no overlap between task paradigms across studies. We argue that this extreme level of task fragmentation poses serious theoretical and methodological barriers to advancing the field. To address these barriers, we propose the need for developing common 'model' task paradigms which could be widely used across labs. Combined with the open sharing of methods and data, we suggest that these model task paradigms could be an important step in increasing the robustness of the motor learning literature and facilitate the cumulative process of science.

It's About Time: Minimizing Hardware and Software Latencies in Speech Research With Real-Time Auditory Feedback

Purpose Various aspects of speech production related to auditory-motor integration and learning have been examined through auditory feedback perturbation paradigms in which participants' acoustic speech output is experimentally altered and played back via earphones/headphones "in real time." Scientific rigor requires high precision in determining and reporting the involved hardware and software latencies. Many reports in the literature, however, are not consistent with the minimum achievable latency for a given experimental setup. Here, we focus specifically on this methodological issue associated with implementing real-time auditory feedback perturbations, and we offer concrete suggestions for increased reproducibility in this particular line of work. Method Hardware and software latencies as well as total feedback loop latency were measured for formant perturbation studies with the Audapter software. Measurements were conducted for various audio interfaces, desktop and laptop computers, and audio drivers. An approach for lowering Audapter's software latency through nondefault parameter specification was also tested. Results Oft-overlooked hardware-specific latencies were not negligible for some of the tested audio interfaces (adding up to 15 ms). Total feedback loop latencies (including both hardware and software latency) were also generally larger than claimed in the literature. Nondefault parameter values can improve Audapter's own processing latency without negative impact on formant tracking. Conclusions Audio interface selection and software parameter optimization substantially affect total feedback loop latency. Thus, the actual total latency (hardware plus software) needs to be correctly measured and described in all published reports. Future speech research with "real-time" auditory feedback perturbations should increase scientific rigor by minimizing this latency.

Production Variability and Categorical Perception of Vowels Are Strongly Linked

Theoretical models of speech production suggest that the speech motor system (SMS) uses auditory goals to determine errors in its auditory output during vowel production. This type of error calculation indicates that within-speaker production variability of a given vowel is related to the size of the vowel’s auditory goal. However, emerging evidence suggests that the SMS may also take into account perceptual knowledge of vowel categories (in addition to auditory goals) to estimate errors in auditory feedback. In this study, we examined how this mechanism influences within-speaker variability in vowel production. We conducted a study (n = 40 adults), consisting of a vowel categorization task and a vowel production task. The vowel categorization task was designed—based on participant-specific vowels—to estimate the categorical perceptual boundary (CPB) between two front vowels (/ε/ and /æ/). Using the vowel production data of each participant, we calculated a variability-based boundary (VBB) located at the “center of mass” of the two vowels. The inverse of the standard deviation of a vowel distribution was used as the “mass” of the vowel. We found that: (a) categorical boundary was located farther from more variable vowels; and (b) the calculated VBB (i.e., the center of mass of the vowels) significantly and positively correlated with the estimated categorical boundary (r = 0.912 for formants calculated in hertz; r = 0.854 for formants calculated in bark). Overall, our findings support a view that vowel production and vowel perception are strongly and bidirectionally linked.

Transfer of Learning: What Does It Tell Us About Speech Production Units?

PURPOSE

Words, syllables, and phonemes have each been regarded as basic encoding units of speech production in various psycholinguistic models. The present article investigates the role of each unit in the interface with speech articulation, using a paradigm from motor control research.

METHOD

Seventy-six native speakers of French were trained to change their production of /be/ in response to an auditory feedback perturbation (auditory-motor learning). We then assessed the magnitude of learning transfer from /be/ to the syllables in 2 pseudowords (/bepe/ and /pebe/) and 1 real word (/bebe/) as well as the aftereffect on the same utterance (/be/) with a between-subjects design. This made it possible to contrast the amplitude of transfer at the levels of the utterance, the syllable, and the phoneme, depending on the position in the word. Linear mixed models allowed us to study the amplitude as well as the dynamics of the transfer and the aftereffect over trials.

RESULTS

Transfer from the training utterance /be/ was observed for all vowels of the test utterances but was larger to the syllable /be/ than to the syllable /pe/ at word-initial position and larger to the 1st syllable than to the 2nd syllable in the utterance.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study suggests that words, syllables, and phonemes may all contribute to the definition of speech motor commands. In addition, the observation of a serial order effect raises new questions related to the connection between psycholinguistic models and speech motor control approaches.