Literature DB >> 16982085

Phoneme monitoring in silent naming and perception in adults who stutter.

Jayanthi Sasisekaran1, Luc F De Nil.   

Abstract

UNLABELLED: The present study investigated phonological encoding skills in persons who stutter (PWS). Participants were 10 PWS (M=31.8 years, S.D.=5.9) matched for age, gender, and handedness with 12 persons who do not stutter (PNS) (M=24.3 years, S.D.=4.3). The groups were compared in a phoneme monitoring task performed during silent picture naming. The phonological complexity of the target items in the task was varied such that participants monitored either compound words or noun phrases. Performance in this task was compared to phoneme monitoring performed on aurally presented target words to investigate whether any differences observed in silent naming were also evident in perception. Analysis of the response time data, in milliseconds, indicated that PWS were significantly slower as compared to PNS in phoneme monitoring during silent naming; group differences were not obtained in the perception task. The groups were also comparable in the response time to phoneme monitoring within compound words and noun phrases in both silent naming and perception. The findings suggested that PWS were slower in the encoding of segmental, phonological units during silent naming. Furthermore, absence of such differences in perception ruled out a general monitoring deficit in PWS. Findings are interpreted within the context of the psycholinguistic theories of stuttering that postulate phonological encoding and/or monitoring as a causal variable in stuttering. EDUCATIONAL
OBJECTIVES: As a result of this activity, the participant should: (1) describe relevant literature on phonological encoding skills in children and adults who stutter, (2) identify paradigms that can be used to investigate phonological processing in PWS, and (3) discuss the role of phonological encoding in speech production.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16982085     DOI: 10.1016/j.jfludis.2006.08.001

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Fluency Disord        ISSN: 0094-730X            Impact factor:   2.538


  13 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.  A preliminary investigation of segmentation and rhyme abilities of children who stutter.

Authors:  Jayanthi Sasisekaran; Courtney T Byrd
Journal:  J Fluency Disord       Date:  2013-01-10       Impact factor: 2.538

3.  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

4.  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

5.  Task difficulty modulates brain-behavior correlations in language production and cognitive control: Behavioral and fMRI evidence from a phonological go/no-go picture-naming paradigm.

Authors:  Haoyun Zhang; Anna Eppes; Anne Beatty-Martínez; Christian Navarro-Torres; Michele T Diaz
Journal:  Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci       Date:  2018-10       Impact factor: 3.282

6.  Cross-sectional study of phoneme and rhyme monitoring abilities in children between 7 and 13 years.

Authors:  Jayanthi Sasisekaran; Christine Weber-Fox
Journal:  Appl Psycholinguist       Date:  2011-06-08

7.  Age of acquisition and repetition priming effects on picture naming of children who do and do not stutter.

Authors:  Julie D Anderson
Journal:  J Fluency Disord       Date:  2008-05-07       Impact factor: 2.538

8.  Use of a phoneme monitoring task to examine lexical access in adults who do and do not stutter.

Authors:  Timothy A Howell; Nan Bernstein Ratner
Journal:  J Fluency Disord       Date:  2018-02-06       Impact factor: 2.538

9.  What Can Network Science Tell Us About Phonology and Language Processing?

Authors:  Michael S Vitevitch
Journal:  Top Cogn Sci       Date:  2021-04-09

10.  From Grapheme to Phonological Output: Performance of Adults Who Stutter on a Word Jumble Task.

Authors:  Megann McGill; Harvey Sussman; Courtney T Byrd
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-03-10       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.