Literature DB >> 10986364

Detection of errors during speech production: a review of speech monitoring models.

A Postma1.   

Abstract

In this paper three theories of speech monitoring are evaluated. The perception-based approach proposes that the same mechanism employed in understanding other-produced language, the speech comprehension system, is also used to monitor one's own speech production. A conceptual, an inner, and an auditory loop convey information to a central, conscious monitor which scrutinizes the adequacy of the ongoing speech flow. In this model, only the end-products in the speech production sequences, the preverbal (propositional) message, the phonetic plan, and the auditory results, are verified. The production-based account assumes multiple local, autonomous monitoring devices, which can look inside formulation components. Moreover, these devices might be tuned to various signals from the actual speech motor execution, e.g. efferent, tactile, and proprioceptive feedback. Finally, node structure theory views error detection as a natural outflow of the activation patterns in the node system for speech production. Errors result in prolonged activation of uncommitted nodes, which in turn may incite error awareness. The approaches differ on the points of consciousness, volition and control, the number of monitoring channels, and their speed, flexibility, and capacity, and whether they can account for concurrent language comprehension disorders. From the empirical evidence presently available, it is argued for a central perception-based monitor, potentially augmented with a few automatic, production-based error detection devices.

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 10986364     DOI: 10.1016/s0010-0277(00)00090-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cognition        ISSN: 0010-0277


  77 in total

1.  Effects of time pressure on mechanisms of speech production and self-monitoring.

Authors:  C C Oomen; A Postma
Journal:  J Psycholinguist Res       Date:  2001-03

Review 2.  Computational neuroanatomy of speech production.

Authors:  Gregory Hickok
Journal:  Nat Rev Neurosci       Date:  2012-01-05       Impact factor: 34.870

3.  Self-Editing: On the Relation Between behavioral and Psycholinguistic Approaches.

Authors:  L Kimberly Epting; Thomas S Critchfield
Journal:  Behav Anal       Date:  2006

4.  Visual feedback and self-monitoring of sign language.

Authors:  Karen Emmorey; Rain Bosworth; Tanya Kraljic
Journal:  J Mem Lang       Date:  2009-10-01       Impact factor: 3.059

5.  Repairing inappropriately specified utterances: revision or restart?

Authors:  Heleen T Boland; Robert J Hartsuiker; Martin J Pickering; Albert Postma
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2005-06

6.  Neural correlates of verbal feedback processing: an fMRI study employing overt speech.

Authors:  Ingrid K Christoffels; Elia Formisano; Niels O Schiller
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2007-09       Impact factor: 5.038

7.  Inner speech slips exhibit lexical bias, but not the phonemic similarity effect.

Authors:  Gary M Oppenheim; Gary S Dell
Journal:  Cognition       Date:  2007-04-02

8.  Halting in Single Word Production: A Test of the Perceptual Loop Theory of Speech Monitoring.

Authors:  L Robert Slevc; Victor S Ferreira
Journal:  J Mem Lang       Date:  2006-05       Impact factor: 3.059

9.  Grammatical Constraints on Language Switching: Language Control is not Just Executive Control.

Authors:  Tamar H Gollan; Matthew Goldrick
Journal:  J Mem Lang       Date:  2016-05-18       Impact factor: 3.059

10.  Interference between conversation and a concurrent visuomotor task.

Authors:  Timothy W Boiteau; Patrick S Malone; Sara A Peters; Amit Almor
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Gen       Date:  2013-02-18
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.