Cardiac reactions to two psychological stressors, acting in combination

Potential interactions among linguistic, autonomic, and motor factors in speech

Though anecdotal reports link certain speech disorders to increases in autonomic arousal, few studies have described the relationship between arousal and speech processes. Additionally, it is unclear how increases in arousal may interact with other cognitive-linguistic processes to affect speech motor control. In this experiment we examine potential interactions between autonomic arousal, linguistic processing, and speech motor coordination in adults and children. Autonomic responses (heart rate, finger pulse volume, tonic skin conductance, and phasic skin conductance) were recorded simultaneously with upper and lower lip movements during speech. The lip aperture variability (LA variability index) across multiple repetitions of sentences that varied in length and syntactic complexity was calculated under low- and high-arousal conditions. High arousal conditions were elicited by performance of the Stroop color word task. Children had significantly higher lip aperture variability index values across all speaking tasks, indicating more variable speech motor coordination. Increases in syntactic complexity and utterance length were associated with increases in speech motor coordination variability in both speaker groups. There was a significant effect of Stroop task, which produced increases in autonomic arousal and increased speech motor variability in both adults and children. These results provide novel evidence that high arousal levels can influence speech motor control in both adults and children.

Speaking speed effects on delayed auditory feedback disruption of speech fluency

24 Italian medical students performed a task of verbal fluency. 12 students (the control group) receiving Normal Auditory Feedback and 12 students receiving Delayed Auditory Feedback (delay of 200 msec.) performed six trials in six different experimental settings: normal or increased speaking rate, and, for each condition, once with bilateral input of the auditory feedback, once to the right ear, and once to the left ear. At the normal speaking rate, the disruptive effect of delayed feedback was confirmed. As the speaking rate increased, the total number of errors increased within the control group but decreased within the group given delayed feedback, although the total number of errors was always greater for the latter. In addition, speech was more disrupted when the auditory input was returned to the right ear (left hemisphere) for all the different conditions: Normal and Delayed Auditory Feedback, normal and increased speaking rate. In particular, the left hemisphere was less resistant to the disruptive effect of the delayed feedback than the right hemisphere. From these results, we suggest that, when speaking more quickly, one uses more central mechanisms of movement programming (cortical-cerebellum-thalamus-cortical, cortical-corpus striatum-thalamus-cortical, and cortical-thalamus-cortical circuits), or attentional control (cortico-reticular-cortical circuits) than peripheral mechanisms (tactile, proprioceptive, and acoustic circuits). This may explain the decreased disruptive influence of delayed auditory feedback on speed, fluency, and quality at increased speaking rates. Hemispheric specialization processes, however, may explain the more pronounced susceptibility of the left hemisphere or the less pronounced susceptibility of the right hemisphere during the delayed feedback condition. In fact, the former processes phonemic, grammatical, and lexical features of words whilst the latter is competent in using metaphors and prosody in controlling the emotional aspects of language. Moreover, the right hemisphere is more active on attentional tasks.