Nonword repetition and phoneme elision in adults who do and do not stutter

Byrd, Courtney T.; Vallely, Megann Nicole; Anderson, Julie D.; Sussman, Harvey M.

doi:10.1016/j.jfludis.2012.03.003

Cited by 59 publications

(87 citation statements)

References 43 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…First, this particular task is thought to allow valuable insight into phonological working memory in isolation with minimal influence from long-term storage of phonological as well as semantic and lexical information. Second, this present study is a systematic replication of a nonword repetition study that we completed with adults who do and do not stutter (i.e., Byrd et al, 2012). Nonword repetition has been shown to differentiate adults who do not stutter from adults who stutter in a few ways.…”

Section: Nonword Repetition In Adults Who Stuttermentioning

confidence: 76%

“…There are significant data to suggest phonological encoding, the process of retrieving the sound segments in words prior to motor programming and execution (Levelt, 1989), is one of the many factors that contribute to the difficulties persons who stutter have establishing and/or maintaining fluent speech (e.g., Aboul Oyoun, El Dessouky, Shohdi, & Fawzy, 2010;Anderson, 2007;Anderson & Byrd, 2008;Bosshardt, 1993;Byrd, Conture, & Ohde, 2007;Byrd, Vallely, Anderson, & Sussman, 2012;cf., Bakhtiar, Ali, & Sadegh, 2007;Hakim & Ratner, 2004;Hennessey, Nang, & Beilby, 2008;Ludlow, Siren, & Zikria, 1997;Melnick, Conture, & Ohde, 2003;Nippold, 2002Nippold, , 2012Ntourou, Conture, & Lipsey, 2011;Pelczarski & Yaruss, 2014;Sasisekaran & Byrd, 2013;Sasisekaran, De Nil, Smyth, & Johnson, 2006;Vincent, Grela, & Gilbert, 2012;Weber-Fox, Spencer, Spruill, & Smith, 2004). For example, of the disorders that co-occur with stuttering, disorders of phonology are among the most frequent (Arndt & Healey, 2001;Louko, Conture, & Edwards, 1999;Yaruss, LaSalle, & Conture, 1998;cf., Nippold, 2001cf., Nippold, , 2012.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Nonword repetition and phoneme elision in adults who do and do not stutter: Vocal versus nonvocal performance differences

Byrd

McGill

Usler

2015

Journal of Fluency Disorders

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Nonword Repetition In Adults Who Stuttermentioning

confidence: 76%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Nonword repetition and phoneme elision in adults who do and do not stutter: Vocal versus nonvocal performance differences

Byrd

McGill

Usler

2015

Journal of Fluency Disorders

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…In this way, nonword repetition may provide a more parsimonious measure of core phonological processing demands than canonical verbal short-term memory tasks (Gathercole et al, 1994). In developmental communication disorders, individuals may perform accurately for one-or two-syllable nonwords but tend to make increasingly more errors relative to age-matched typically developing children or adults as the number of syllables (or the phonological working memory load) increases (Byrd, Vallely, Anderson, & Sussman, 2012;Gathercole & Baddeley, 1990;Gathercole et al, 1994;Graf Estes et al, 2007;Montgomery, 1995;Riches, Loucas, Baird, Charman, & Simonoff, 2011;Wagner et al, 1999).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Phonological Working Memory for Words and Nonwords in Cerebral Cortex

Perrachione

Ghosh

Ostrovskaya

et al. 2017

J Speech Lang Hear Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: The primary purpose of this study was to identify the brain bases of phonological working memory (the shortterm maintenance of speech sounds) using behavioral tasks analogous to clinically sensitive assessments of nonword repetition. The secondary purpose of the study was to identify how individual differences in brain activation were related to participants' nonword repetition abilities. Method: We used functional magnetic resonance imaging to measure neurophysiological response during a nonword discrimination task derived from standard clinical assessments of phonological working memory. Healthy adult control participants (N = 16) discriminated pairs of real words or nonwords under varying phonological working memory load, which we manipulated by parametrically varying the number of syllables in target (non)words. Participants' cognitive and phonological abilities were also measured using standardized assessments. Results: Neurophysiological responses in bilateral superior temporal gyrus, inferior frontal gyrus, and supplementary motor area increased with greater phonological working memory load. Activation in left superior temporal gyrus during nonword discrimination correlated with participants' performance on standard clinical nonword repetition tests. Conclusion: These results suggest that phonological working memory is related to the function of cortical structures that canonically underlie speech perception and production. T he cognitive processes that underlie the short-term maintenance of language sounds are known collectively as phonological working memory. Phonological working memory is thought to support a wide range of linguistic behaviors, including novel word learning and vocabulary development, maintenance of information during sentence and discourse processing, and the acquisition of reading skill

show abstract

“…In terms of speech planning difficulties, a considerable amount of data implicate weaknesses in phonological encoding early in life as a key area of compromise (e.g., [7-9], for an opposing viewpoint, see [10, 11]), particularly for children whose stuttering persists into adulthood (e.g., [12-15]). These data are further supported by studies which indicate that many adults who stutter (AWS) perform more poorly than adults who do not stutter (AWNS) when completing experimental tasks that rely on efficient phonological processing (e.g., nonword repetition [16-18]; silent error monitoring [19]; phoneme elision [16, 17]; word jumble tasks [20]; silent rhyme judgment [21, 22]; silent phoneme monitoring [23-25]). Although differences in the phonological abilities of AWS are not unequivocal (cf.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 61%

Uniqueness Point Effects during Speech Planning in Adults Who Do and Do Not Stutter

Coalson

Byrd

Kuylen

2017

Folia Phoniatr Logop

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background/Aims: Previous studies employing a variety of tasks have demonstrated that adults who stutter (AWS) present with phonological encoding differences compared to adults who do not stutter (AWNS). The present study examined whether atypical preverbal monitoring also influenced AWS performance during one such paradigm – the silent phoneme monitoring task. Specifically, we investigated whether monitoring latencies for AWS were accelerated after the word’s uniqueness point – the phoneme that isolates the word from all lexical competitors – as observed for AWNS when monitoring internal and external speech. Methods: Twenty adults (10 AWS, 10 AWNS) completed a silent phoneme monitoring task using stimuli which contained either (a) early uniqueness points (EUP), (b) late uniqueness points, or (c) no uniqueness point (NUP). Response latency when identifying word-final phonemes was measured. Results: AWNS exhibited the expected uniqueness point effect when monitoring internal speech; word-final phonemes were accessed more rapidly for words with EUP than NUP. In contrast, AWS did not differ in the phoneme monitoring speed. That is, AWS did not exhibit the expected uniqueness point effects. Conclusion: Findings suggest that inefficient or atypical preverbal monitoring may be present in AWS and support theories that implicate the internal speech monitor as an area of deficit.

show abstract

Nonword repetition and phoneme elision in adults who do and do not stutter

Cited by 59 publications

References 43 publications

Nonword repetition and phoneme elision in adults who do and do not stutter: Vocal versus nonvocal performance differences

Nonword repetition and phoneme elision in adults who do and do not stutter: Vocal versus nonvocal performance differences

Phonological Working Memory for Words and Nonwords in Cerebral Cortex

Uniqueness Point Effects during Speech Planning in Adults Who Do and Do Not Stutter

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About