2011
DOI: 10.1044/1092-4388(2010/10-0131)
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A Critical Evaluation of Gestural Stiffness Estimations in Speech Production Based on a Linear Second-Order Model

Abstract: Any conclusions about speech control based on stiffness estimations using linear second-order models should therefore be considered with caution.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
15
0

Year Published

2013
2013
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
7
2

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 24 publications
(17 citation statements)
references
References 17 publications
2
15
0
Order By: Relevance
“…However, given that stiffness as a control parameter in a dynamical system is not entirely reliable (e.g. Fuchs, Perrier & Hartinger 2011), and that the boundary-related temporal variation may be modeled by a π-gesture that modulates the 'clock-rate', we will consider the 'clock-rate' parameter as modulating the temporal variation in the present study. )…”
Section: Temporal Modulation By Clock-ratementioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, given that stiffness as a control parameter in a dynamical system is not entirely reliable (e.g. Fuchs, Perrier & Hartinger 2011), and that the boundary-related temporal variation may be modeled by a π-gesture that modulates the 'clock-rate', we will consider the 'clock-rate' parameter as modulating the temporal variation in the present study. )…”
Section: Temporal Modulation By Clock-ratementioning
confidence: 99%
“…This measure is based on the model in which the limbs (Cooke, 1980) and oral articulators (Ostry et al, 1984; Ostry et al, 1983; Ostry & Munhall, 1985; Perkell & Zandipour, 2002; Perkell, Zandipour, Matthies, & Lane, 2002; van Lieshout, Bose, Square, & Steele, 2007; Vatikiotis-Bateson & Kelso, 1993) are described as mass-spring systems. This model has been contested (Burdet, Osu, Franklin, Milner, & Kawato, 2001; Franklin et al, 2007; Fuchs, Perrier, Hartinger, 2011; Gomi & Honda, 2002), but without disputing or supporting the applicability of the mass-spring model, this measure can be used as an indicator of a musculoskeletal system’s mechanical state. Specifically, the slope of the linear regression of maximum velocity to movement amplitude has been very usefully and broadly applied as a kinematic index of mass-normalized stiffness.…”
Section: Potential Measures Of Muscle Tensionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Third, our analyses did not take into account any potential influence of the orofacial system's biomechanics. We acknowledge that even within a single movement the role of biomechanical factors does not remain constant (Fuchs et al, 2011). Nevertheless, we believe that it is unlikely that factors such as muscle properties and interaction torques, rather than central planning and correction processes, can explain the overall results of this study.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%