Literature DB >> 15842008

Phonologic processing in adults who stutter: electrophysiological and behavioral evidence.

Christine Weber-Fox1, Rebecca M C Spencer, John E Spruill, Anne Smith.   

Abstract

Event-related brain potentials (ERPs), judgment accuracy, and reaction times (RTs) were obtained for 11 adults who stutter and 11 normally fluent speakers as they performed a rhyme judgment task of visually presented word pairs. Half of the word pairs (i.e., prime and target) were phonologically and orthographically congruent across words. That is, the words looked orthographically similar and rhymed (e.g., thrown, own) or did not look similar and did not rhyme (e.g., cake, own). The phonologic and orthographic information across the remaining pairs was incongruent. That is, the words looked similar but did not rhyme (e.g., gown, own) or did not look similar but rhymed (e.g., cone, own). Adults who stutter and those who are normally fluent exhibited similar phonologic processing as indexed by ERPs, response accuracy, and RTs. However, longer RTs for adults who stutter indicated their greater sensitivity to the increased cognitive loads imposed by phonologic/orthographic incongruency. Also, unlike the normally fluent speakers, the adults who stutter exhibited a right hemisphere asymmetry in the rhyme judgment task, as indexed by the peak amplitude of the rhyming effect (difference wave) component. Overall, these findings do not support theories of the etiology of stuttering that posit a core phonologic-processing deficit. Rather we provide evidence that adults who stutter are more vulnerable to increased cognitive loads and display greater right hemisphere involvement in late cognitive processes.

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15842008     DOI: 10.1044/1092-4388(2004/094)

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res        ISSN: 1092-4388            Impact factor:   2.297


  31 in total

1.  Non-linguistic auditory processing and working memory update in pre-school children who stutter: an electrophysiological study.

Authors:  Natalya Kaganovich; Amanda Hampton Wray; Christine Weber-Fox
Journal:  Dev Neuropsychol       Date:  2010       Impact factor: 2.253

2.  EEG Mu (µ) rhythm spectra and oscillatory activity differentiate stuttering from non-stuttering adults.

Authors:  Tim Saltuklaroglu; Ashley W Harkrider; David Thornton; David Jenson; Tiffani Kittilstved
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2017-04-09       Impact factor: 6.556

3.  Atypical neural functions underlying phonological processing and silent rehearsal in children who stutter.

Authors:  Christine Weber-Fox; John E Spruill; Rebecca Spencer; Anne Smith
Journal:  Dev Sci       Date:  2008-03

4.  Neural Processes Underlying Nonword Rhyme Differentiate Eventual Stuttering Persistence and Recovery.

Authors:  Amanda Hampton Wray; Gregory Spray
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2020-07-27       Impact factor: 2.297

5.  Abnormal neural response to phonological working memory demands in persistent developmental stuttering.

Authors:  Yang Yang; Fanlu Jia; Peter T Fox; Wai Ting Siok; Li Hai Tan
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2018-08-26       Impact factor: 5.038

6.  Effects of perceptual and conceptual similarity in lexical priming of young children who stutter: preliminary findings.

Authors:  Kia N Hartfield; Edward G Conture
Journal:  J Fluency Disord       Date:  2006-09-28       Impact factor: 2.538

7.  Attention demands of language production in adults who stutter.

Authors:  Nathan D Maxfield; Wendy L Olsen; Daniel Kleinman; Stefan A Frisch; Victor S Ferreira; Jennifer J Lister
Journal:  Clin Neurophysiol       Date:  2016-02-01       Impact factor: 3.708

8.  The Influence of Executive Functions on Phonemic Processing in Children Who Do and Do Not Stutter.

Authors:  Jayanthi Sasisekaran; Shriya Basu
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2017-10-17       Impact factor: 2.297

9.  Stuttering and natural speech processing of semantic and syntactic constraints on verbs.

Authors:  Christine Weber-Fox; Amanda Hampton
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2008-07-29       Impact factor: 2.297

10.  The neurobiology of rhyme judgment by deaf and hearing adults: an ERP study.

Authors:  Mairéad Macsweeney; Usha Goswami; Helen Neville
Journal:  J Cogn Neurosci       Date:  2013-02-28       Impact factor: 3.225

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.