Literature DB >> 21156877

Motor movement matters: the flexible abstractness of inner speech.

Gary M Oppenheim1, Gary S Dell.   

Abstract

Inner speech is typically characterized as either the activation of abstract linguistic representations or a detailed articulatory simulation that lacks only the production of sound. We present a study of the speech errors that occur during the inner recitation of tongue-twister-like phrases. Two forms of inner speech were tested: inner speech without articulatory movements and articulated (mouthed) inner speech. Although mouthing one's inner speech could reasonably be assumed to require more articulatory planning, prominent theories assume that such planning should not affect the experience of inner speech and, consequently, the errors that are "heard" during its production. The errors occurring in articulated inner speech exhibited the phonemic similarity effect and the lexical bias effect--two speech-error phenomena that, in overt speech, have been localized to an articulatory-feature-processing level and a lexical-phonological level, respectively. In contrast, errors in unarticulated inner speech did not exhibit the phonemic similarity effect--just the lexical bias effect. The results are interpreted as support for a flexible abstraction account of inner speech. This conclusion has ramifications for the embodiment of language and speech and for the theories of speech production.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 21156877      PMCID: PMC3057878          DOI: 10.3758/MC.38.8.1147

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Mem Cognit        ISSN: 0090-502X


  39 in total

Review 1.  A theory of lexical access in speech production.

Authors:  W J Levelt; A Roelofs; A S Meyer
Journal:  Behav Brain Sci       Date:  1999-02       Impact factor: 12.579

2.  An event-related fMRI study of overt and covert word stem completion.

Authors:  E D Palmer; H J Rosen; J G Ojemann; R L Buckner; W M Kelley; S E Petersen
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2001-07       Impact factor: 6.556

Review 3.  Detection of errors during speech production: a review of speech monitoring models.

Authors:  A Postma
Journal:  Cognition       Date:  2000-11-16

Review 4.  The motor theory of speech perception reviewed.

Authors:  Bruno Galantucci; Carol A Fowler; M T Turvey
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2006-06

5.  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

6.  Spoonerisms: the structure of errors in the serial order of speech.

Authors:  D G MacKay
Journal:  Neuropsychologia       Date:  1970-07       Impact factor: 3.139

7.  Phonological errors in aphasic naming: comprehension, monitoring and lexicality.

Authors:  L Nickels; D Howard
Journal:  Cortex       Date:  1995-06       Impact factor: 4.027

8.  Some neurolinguistic implications of prearticulatory editing in production.

Authors:  S M Garnsey; G S Dell
Journal:  Brain Lang       Date:  1984-09       Impact factor: 2.381

9.  What the reader's eye tells the mind's ear: silent reading activates inner speech.

Authors:  M Abramson; S D Goldinger
Journal:  Percept Psychophys       Date:  1997-10

10.  Sequential processing of lexical, grammatical, and phonological information within Broca's area.

Authors:  Ned T Sahin; Steven Pinker; Sydney S Cash; Donald Schomer; Eric Halgren
Journal:  Science       Date:  2009-10-16       Impact factor: 47.728

View more
  32 in total

Review 1.  Computational neuroanatomy of speech production.

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

2.  Dorsomedial prefontal cortex supports spontaneous thinking per se.

Authors:  T T Raij; T J J Riekki
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2017-03-31       Impact factor: 5.038

3.  Learning to speak by listening: Transfer of phonotactics from perception to production.

Authors:  Audrey K Kittredge; Gary S Dell
Journal:  J Mem Lang       Date:  2015-10-12       Impact factor: 3.059

4.  New phonotactic constraints learned implicitly by producing syllable strings generalize to the production of new syllables.

Authors:  Jill A Warker; Gary S Dell
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  2015-06-01       Impact factor: 3.051

5.  Self-reported inner speech relates to phonological retrieval ability in people with aphasia.

Authors:  Mackenzie E Fama; Mary P Henderson; Sarah F Snider; William Hayward; Rhonda B Friedman; Peter E Turkeltaub
Journal:  Conscious Cogn       Date:  2019-03-25

6.  Treating apraxia of speech with an implicit protocol that activates speech motor areas via inner speech.

Authors:  Dana Farias; Christine Herrick Davis; Stephen M Wilson
Journal:  Aphasiology       Date:  2014-01-01       Impact factor: 2.773

7.  The case for subphonemic attenuation in inner speech: comment on Corley, Brocklehurst, and Moat (2011).

Authors:  Gary M Oppenheim
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  2012-03       Impact factor: 3.051

Review 8.  Inner Speech in Aphasia: Current Evidence, Clinical Implications, and Future Directions.

Authors:  Mackenzie E Fama; Peter E Turkeltaub
Journal:  Am J Speech Lang Pathol       Date:  2019-09-13       Impact factor: 2.408

9.  Phonetic detail and lateralization of reading-related inner speech and of auditory and somatosensory feedback processing during overt reading.

Authors:  Christian A Kell; Maritza Darquea; Marion Behrens; Lorenzo Cordani; Christian Keller; Susanne Fuchs
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2016-09-13       Impact factor: 5.038

10.  Objective support for subjective reports of successful inner speech in two people with aphasia.

Authors:  William Hayward; Sarah F Snider; George Luta; Rhonda B Friedman; Peter E Turkeltaub
Journal:  Cogn Neuropsychol       Date:  2016-07-29       Impact factor: 2.468

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.