日本語
 
Help Privacy Policy ポリシー/免責事項
  詳細検索ブラウズ

アイテム詳細


公開

ポスター

Effects of auditory feedback consistency on vowel production

MPS-Authors
/persons/resource/persons138192

Franken,  Matthias K.
Donders Institute for Brain, Cognition and Behaviour;
Neurobiology of Language Department, MPI for Psycholinguistics, Max Planck Society;

/persons/resource/persons69

Hagoort,  Peter
Donders Institute for Brain, Cognition and Behaviour;
Neurobiology of Language Department, MPI for Psycholinguistics, Max Planck Society;

/persons/resource/persons2693

Acheson,  Daniel J.
Donders Institute for Brain, Cognition and Behaviour;
Neurobiology of Language Department, MPI for Psycholinguistics, Max Planck Society;

Fulltext (restricted access)
There are currently no full texts shared for your IP range.
フルテキスト (公開)

PIF2015_portrait_20copy.pdf
(出版社版), 3MB

付随資料 (公開)
There is no public supplementary material available
引用

Franken, M. K., McQueen, J. M., Hagoort, P., & Acheson, D. J. (2015). Effects of auditory feedback consistency on vowel production. Poster presented at Psycholinguistics in Flanders, Marche-en-Famenne.


引用: https://hdl.handle.net/11858/00-001M-0000-0026-CACB-9
要旨
In investigations of feedback control during speech production, researchers have focused on two different kinds of responses to erroneous or unexpected auditory feedback. Compensation refers to online, feedback-based corrections of articulations. In contrast, adaptation refers to long-term changes in the speech production system after exposure to erroneous/unexpected feedback, which may last even after feedback is normal again. In the current study, we aimed to compare both types of feedback responses by investigating the conditions under which the system starts adapting in addition to merely compensating. Participants vocalized long vowels while they were exposed to either consistently altered auditory feedback, or to feedback that was unpredictably either altered or normal. Participants were not aware of the manipulation of auditory feedback. We predicted that both conditions would elicit compensation, whereas adaptation would be stronger when the altered feedback was consistent across trials. The results show that although there seems to be somewhat more adaptation for the consistently altered feedback condition, a substantial amount of individual variability led to statistically unreliable effects at the group level. The results stress the importance of taking into account individual differences and show that people vary widely in how they respond to altered auditory feedback.