Literature DB >> 20136227

Compensations in response to real-time formant perturbations of different magnitudes.

Ewen N MacDonald1, Robyn Goldberg, Kevin G Munhall.   

Abstract

Previous auditory perturbation studies have demonstrated that talkers spontaneously compensate for real-time formant-shifts by altering formant production in a manner opposite to the perturbation. Here, two experiments were conducted to examine the effect of amplitude of perturbation on the compensatory behavior for the vowel /epsilon/. In the first experiment, 20 male talkers received three step-changes in acoustic feedback: F1 was increased by 50, 100, and 200 Hz, while F2 was simultaneously decreased by 75, 125, and 250 Hz. In the second experiment, 21 male talkers received acoustic feedback in which the shifts in F1 and F2 were incremented by +4 and -5 Hz on each utterance to a maximum of +350 and -450 Hz, respectively. In both experiments, talkers altered production of F1 and F2 in a manner opposite to that of the formant-shift perturbation. Compensation was approximately 25%-30% of the perturbation magnitude for shifts in F1 and F2 up to 200 and 250 Hz, respectively. As larger shifts were applied, compensation reached a plateau and then decreased. The similarity of results across experiments suggests that the compensatory response is dependent on the perturbation magnitude but not on the rate at which the perturbation is introduced.

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20136227      PMCID: PMC2830267          DOI: 10.1121/1.3278606

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am        ISSN: 0001-4966            Impact factor:   1.840


  28 in total

1.  Multiple paired forward and inverse models for motor control.

Authors:  D M Wolpert; M Kawato
Journal:  Neural Netw       Date:  1998-10

2.  Remapping auditory-motor representations in voice production.

Authors:  Jeffery A Jones; K G Munhall
Journal:  Curr Biol       Date:  2005-10-11       Impact factor: 10.834

3.  Behavioral reference frames for planning human reaching movements.

Authors:  Sabine M Beurze; Stan Van Pelt; W Pieter Medendorp
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2006-03-29       Impact factor: 2.714

Review 4.  Combining visual and auditory information.

Authors:  David Burr; David Alais
Journal:  Prog Brain Res       Date:  2006       Impact factor: 2.453

5.  Interactions between auditory and somatosensory feedback for voice F0 control.

Authors:  Charles R Larson; Kenneth W Altman; Hanjun Liu; Timothy C Hain
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2008-03-14       Impact factor: 1.972

6.  Effects of perturbation magnitude and voice F0 level on the pitch-shift reflex.

Authors:  Hanjun Liu; Charles R Larson
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2007-12       Impact factor: 1.840

7.  The role of hand size in the fake-hand illusion paradigm.

Authors:  Francesco Pavani; Massimiliano Zampini
Journal:  Perception       Date:  2007       Impact factor: 1.490

8.  Sensorimotor adaptation in speech production.

Authors:  J F Houde; M I Jordan
Journal:  Science       Date:  1998-02-20       Impact factor: 47.728

9.  Interacting adaptive processes with different timescales underlie short-term motor learning.

Authors:  Maurice A Smith; Ali Ghazizadeh; Reza Shadmehr
Journal:  PLoS Biol       Date:  2006-05-23       Impact factor: 8.029

10.  Speech motor learning in profoundly deaf adults.

Authors:  Sazzad M Nasir; David J Ostry
Journal:  Nat Neurosci       Date:  2008-09-14       Impact factor: 24.884

View more
  36 in total

1.  A cross-language study of compensation in response to real-time formant perturbation.

Authors:  Takashi Mitsuya; Ewen N Macdonald; David W Purcell; Kevin G Munhall
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2011-11       Impact factor: 1.840

2.  Adaptive auditory feedback control of the production of formant trajectories in the Mandarin triphthong /iau/ and its pattern of generalization.

Authors:  Shanqing Cai; Satrajit S Ghosh; Frank H Guenther; Joseph S Perkell
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2010-10       Impact factor: 1.840

3.  Probing the independence of formant control using altered auditory feedback.

Authors:  Ewen N MacDonald; David W Purcell; Kevin G Munhall
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2011-02       Impact factor: 1.840

4.  Vocal learning is constrained by the statistics of sensorimotor experience.

Authors:  Samuel J Sober; Michael S Brainard
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2012-12-03       Impact factor: 11.205

5.  Language dependent vowel representation in speech production.

Authors:  Takashi Mitsuya; Fabienne Samson; Lucie Ménard; Kevin G Munhall
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2013-05       Impact factor: 1.840

6.  Temporal control and compensation for perturbed voicing feedback.

Authors:  Takashi Mitsuya; Ewen N MacDonald; Kevin G Munhall
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2014-05       Impact factor: 1.840

7.  Contribution of sensory memory to speech motor learning.

Authors:  Takayuki Ito; Jiachuan Bai; David J Ostry
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2020-09-09       Impact factor: 2.714

8.  Children's development of self-regulation in speech production.

Authors:  Ewen N MacDonald; Elizabeth K Johnson; Jaime Forsythe; Paul Plante; Kevin G Munhall
Journal:  Curr Biol       Date:  2011-12-22       Impact factor: 10.834

9.  Modulation of auditory-motor learning in response to formant perturbation as a function of delayed auditory feedback.

Authors:  Takashi Mitsuya; Kevin G Munhall; David W Purcell
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2017-04       Impact factor: 1.840

10.  Auditory Feedback Control Mechanisms Do Not Contribute to Cortical Hyperactivity Within the Voice Production Network in Adductor Spasmodic Dysphonia.

Authors:  Ayoub Daliri; Elizabeth S Heller Murray; Anne J Blood; James Burns; J Pieter Noordzij; Alfonso Nieto-Castanon; Jason A Tourville; Frank H Guenther
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2020-02-24       Impact factor: 2.297

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.