Detection of Gap and Modulations: Auditory Temporal Resolution Deficits in Adults Who Stutter

Abstract

<b><i>Background:</i></b> Recent models of speech production suggest a link between speech production and perception. Persons with stuttering are known to have deficits in sensorimotor timing and exhibit auditory processing problems. Most of the earlier studies have focused on assessing temporal ordering in adults who stutter (AWS), but limited attempts have been made to document temporal resolution abilities in AWS. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> A group of 16 AWS and 16 age- and gender-matched adults who do not stutter (AWNS) were recruited for the study. Temporal resolution abilities were assessed using the Gap Detection Test and temporal modulation transfer function (TMTF). <b><i>Results:</i></b> The results revealed significant differences in TMTF between AWS and AWNS, but no differences were found in the gap detection thresholds. <b><i>Conclusions:</i></b> Results suggest that the sensory representations of the temporal modulations are compromised in AWS, which may contribute to the programming of rhythmic movements during speech planning.

Overview of Conditions that Immediately Reduce Stuttering and A Unifying Account for Their Effect

“…However, more recent empirical findings do not sup-port this hypothesis: If AF-based monitoring was over-sensitive in terms of timing, one would expect stronger responses to time manipulation of AF, but the opposite was found: Adults who stutter (AWS) showed weaker articulatory compensation of unexpected time-varying AF perturbations than fluent controls (Cai et al, 2014). Moreover, Devaraju et al (2020) found AWS, as compared with fluent controls, to be less sensitive to temporal fluctuations in speech rhythm.…”

“…More important, abnormalities were found even in the processing of non-speech auditory stimuli (e.g., Arcuri, Schiefer, & Azevedo, 2017;Chang et al, 2009;Devaraju, Maruthy, & Kumar, 2020;Dietrich, Barry, & Parker, 1995;Hampton & Weber-Fox, 2009;Howell, Davis, & Williams, 2006;Kikuchi et al, 2011: Saltuklaroglu et al, 2017. The results of these studies are not well comparable because of different approaches and methods; however, some authors (Kikuchi et al, 2011(Kikuchi et al, , 2017Saltuklaroglu et al, 2017) point to impaired sensory gating during the basic processing of audi-tory input, that is, the processing of redundant input is insufficiently suppressed.…”

Auditory Processing Abilities of Children who Stutter: Effect of Speech Therapy

“…Difficulties in auditory processing abilities among individuals who stutter have been measured using behavioral and electrophysiological tests (Jansson-Verkasalo et al, 2014) [11] . Frequently used behavioral tests are; dichotic digit test (DDT) (Robb et al, 2013) [12] for sound localization and lateralization, gap in noise test (GIN) (Devaraju et al, 2019) [13] for auditory temporal discrimination and resolution, speech intelligibility perception in noise (SPIN) (Asal and Abdo, 2014) [14] for auditory closure, and pitch pattern sequence test (PPST) (Lotfi et al, 2020) [15] for temporal ordering or sequencing. Frequently used electrophysiological tests are cortical auditory evoked potentials (CAEPs) (Ismail et al, 2017) [16] and speech auditory brain stem response (sABR) (Mozaffarilegha et al, 2019) [17] .…”

On the Role of Neural Oscillations Across Timescales in Speech and Music Processing

“…This was interpreted in the context of the temporal sampling hypothesis ( Goswami, 2011 , 2019 ), which states that delta and theta oscillations in auditory cortex are important for prosody perception and temporal integration at the syllable rate, respectively. The temporal sampling hypothesis is also applicable to other communication disorders like stuttering, wherein individuals exhibit impaired rhythm processing ( Wieland et al, 2015 ), poor temporal resolution ( Devaraju et al, 2020 ), and aberrant neural phase coherence when planning speech utterances ( Sengupta et al, 2019 ).…”