Compensation for Jaw Fixation by Aphasic Patients

Baum, Shari R.; Kim, Jean A; Katz, William F.

doi:10.1006/brln.1997.1734

Cited by 12 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We propose that left-lateralized inferior frontal and lateral premotor cortex contributes to speech movements by using well-learned (feedforward) speech motor programs, while right-lateralized inferior frontal and lateral premotor cortex contributes to speech movements by using sensory feedback. Such a theory is consistent with reports from clinical studies that left hemisphere damaged aphasic and apraxia of speech subjects are largely spared in terms of their ability to compensate for somatosensory perturbations during speech (Baum et al, 1997; Baum, 1999; Jacks, 2008). This theory also explains why damage to right hemisphere premotor areas typically does not result in apraxia of speech (Duffy, 2005), since, according to this theory, feedforward speech motor programs are typically maintained in the left hemisphere.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

“…Despite the large number of behavioral studies that have utilized static and dynamic perturbations to the articulators (e.g., Abbs and Gracco, 1984; Baum et al, 1996; Baum et al, 1997; Baum, 1999; Folkins and Abbs, 1975; Folkins and Zimmerman, 1982; Gay et al, 1981; Gomi et al, 2002; Gracco and Abbs, 1985; Jacks, 2008; Kelso et al, 1984; Lane et al, 2005; Lindblom et al, 1979; McFarland and Baum, 1995; Nasir and Ostry, 2006, 2008, 2009; Tremblay et al, 2003), few researchers have attempted to use non-invasive imaging techniques to investigate the neural substrates underlying the somatosensory feedback control of fluent speech production. Part of the challenge is that a device must be created that not only perturbs subjects’ articulator movements, but is also MR compatible.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

fMRI investigation of unexpected somatosensory feedback perturbation during speech

et al. 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Somatosensory feedback plays a critical role in the coordination of articulator movements for speech production. In response to unexpected resistance to lip or jaw movements during speech, fluent speakers can use the difference between the somatosensory expectations of a speech sound and the actual somatosensory feedback to adjust the trajectories of functionally relevant but unimpeded articulators. In an effort to investigate the neural substrates underlying the somatosensory feedback control of speech, we used an event-related sparse sampling functional magnetic resonance imaging paradigm and a novel pneumatic device that unpredictably blocked subjects' jaw movements. In comparison to speech, perturbed speech, in which jaw perturbation prompted the generation of compensatory speech motor commands, demonstrated increased effects in bilateral ventral motor cortex, right-lateralized anterior supramarginal gyrus, inferior frontal gyrus pars triangularis and ventral premotor cortex, and bilateral inferior posterior cerebellum (lobule VIII). Structural equation modeling revealed a significant increased influence from left anterior supramarginal gyrus to right anterior supramarginal gyrus and from left anterior supramarginal gyrus to right ventral premotor cortex as well as a significant increased reciprocal influence between right ventral premotor cortex and right ventral motor cortex and right anterior supramarginal gyrus and right inferior frontal gyrus pars triangularis for perturbed speech relative to speech. These results suggest that bilateral anterior supramarginal gyrus, right inferior frontal gyrus pars triangularis, right ventral premotor and motor cortices are functionally coupled and influence speech motor output when somatosensory feedback is unexpectedly perturbed during speech production.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

fMRI investigation of unexpected somatosensory feedback perturbation during speech

et al. 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…One way to address this issue is to examine individuals with focal cortical damage (e.g., aphasia). Although early work suggested that Brodmann's area 44 might be involved in CA processing (Sussman, Marquardt, MacNeilage, & Hutchison, 1986), subsequent research has suggested that both anterior-and posterior-lesioned aphasics show essentially normal adaptation to bite block perturbations during vowel production (e.g., Baum, Kim, & Katz, 1997). These findings suggest that CA is mediated by neural systems other than strictly intracortical connections.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 98%

Poster Session 1

et al. 2000

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…In a report about bite-block speech (Fowler & Turvey, 1980; cf. Baum, Kim & Katz, 1997), excursions of the mandible were restricted during the production of vowels by the assignment to retain a 10 mm by 14 mm wood dowel between the teeth. Although American English vowels are said to differ in height, this method fixes the height of the jaw, forcing an adaptation to the constraining condition.…”

Section: Points Of Disanalogymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Reprinted with permission from: Baum, S. R., & McFarland, D. H. (1997). The development of speech adaptation to an artificial palate.…”

Section: Figurementioning

confidence: 99%

Analogy and disanalogy in production and perception of speech

Remez

2014

Language, Cognition and Neuroscience

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A varied psychological vocabulary now describes the cognitive and social conditions of language production, the ultimate result of which is the mechanical action of vocal musculature in spoken expression. Following the logic of the speech chain, descriptions of production have often exhibited a clear analogy to accounts of perception. This reciprocality is especially evident in explanations that rely on reafference to control production, on articulation to inform perception, and on strict parity between produced and perceived form to provide invariance in the relation between abstract linguistic objects and observed expression. However, a causal account of production and perception cannot derive solely from this hopeful analogy. Despite sharing of abstract linguistic representations, the control functions in production and perception as well as the constraints on their use stand in fundamental disanalogy. This is readily seen in the different adaptive challenges to production — to speak in a single voice — and perception — to resolve familiar linguistic properties in any voice. This acknowledgment sets descriptive and theoretical challenges that break the symmetry of production and perception. As a consequence, this recognition dislodges an old impasse between the psychoacoustic and motoric accounts in the regulation of production and perception.

show abstract

Compensation for Jaw Fixation by Aphasic Patients

Cited by 12 publications

References 18 publications

fMRI investigation of unexpected somatosensory feedback perturbation during speech

fMRI investigation of unexpected somatosensory feedback perturbation during speech

Poster Session 1

Analogy and disanalogy in production and perception of speech

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About