The role of the motor system in discriminating normal and degraded speech sounds

D’Ausilio, Alessandro; Bufalari, Ilaria; Salmas, Paola; Fadiga, Luciano

doi:10.1016/j.cortex.2011.05.017

Cited by 111 publications

(112 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Therefore, it was possible to demonstrate that individuals who were particularly good at perceiving distorted speech also independently demonstrated greater motor activation, relative to poor perceivers. This is consistent with the notion that increased sensorimotor processing may improve speech perception (D'Ausilio et al, 2012;Wilson and Knoblich, 2005). Crucially, the increase in motor activity from natural to distorted speech perception was positively correlated with better identification accuracy of distorted speech.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 77%

The effect of speech distortion on the excitability of articulatory motor cortex

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 77%

The effect of speech distortion on the excitability of articulatory motor cortex

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…These motor and premotor activations are in accordance with previous studies on auditory, visual, and audiovisual speech perception showing a key role of motor regions in speech processing (e.g., d'Ausilio et al, 2009d'Ausilio et al, , 2011Sato et al, 2009Sato et al, , 2010Möttönen & Watkins, 2009;Meister et al, 2007;Skipper et al, 2005Skipper et al, , 2007Pekkola et al, 2006;Pulvermuller et al, 2006;Wilson & Iacoboni, 2006;Ojanen et al, 2005;Callan et al, 2003Callan et al, , 2004Watkins & Paus, 2004;Wilson et al, 2004;Calvert & Campbell, 2003;Watkins et al, 2003;Campbell et al, 2001;Calvert et al, 2000). It is worthwhile noting that, in this study, participants were only asked to attentively listen to and/or watch speech stimuli.…”

Section: Visuo-lingual and Visuo-facial Speech Stimuli Share A Commonsupporting

confidence: 72%

“…Brain areas involved in the planning and execution of speech actions (i.e., the posterior part of the left inferior frontal gyrus, the premotor and primary motor cortices) have indeed shown neural responses during auditory speech perception (e.g., Pulvermuller et al, 2006;Wilson & Iacoboni, 2006;Wilson, Saygin, Sereno, & Iacoboni, 2004). In addition, repetitive and double-pulse TMS studies also suggest that speech motor regions are causally recruited during auditory speech categorization, especially in case of complex situations (e.g., the perception of acoustically ambiguous syllables or when phonological segmentation or working memory processes are strongly required; d'Ausilio, Bufalari, Salmas, & Fadiga, 2011;d'Ausilio et al, 2009;Möttönen & Watkins, 2009;Sato, Tremblay, & Gracco, 2009;Meister, Wilson, Deblieck, Wu, & Iacoboni, 2007). Taken together, these results support the idea that our motor knowledge used to produce speech sounds helps to partly constraint phonetic decoding of the sensory inputs, as proposed in motor and sensorimotor theories of speech perception and language comprehension (Pickering & Garrod, 2013;Schwartz, Ménard, Basirat, & Sato, 2012;Skipper, Van Wassenhove, Nussman, & Small, 2007;Liberman & Mattingly, 1985).…”

Section: Motor Resonance Extends To Speech Actionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Inside Speech: Multisensory and Modality-specific Processing of Tongue and Lip Speech Actions

Treille

Vilain

Hueber

et al. 2017

Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract■ Action recognition has been found to rely not only on sensory brain areas but also partly on the observer's motor system. However, whether distinct auditory and visual experiences of an action modulate sensorimotor activity remains largely unknown. In the present sparse sampling fMRI study, we determined to which extent sensory and motor representations interact during the perception of tongue and lip speech actions. Tongue and lip speech actions were selected because tongue movements of our interlocutor are accessible via their impact on speech acoustics but not visible because of its position inside the vocal tract, whereas lip movements are both "audible" and visible. Participants were presented with auditory, visual, and audiovisual speech actions, with the visual inputs related to either a sagittal view of the tongue movements or a facial view of the lip movements of a speaker, previously recorded by an ultrasound imaging system and a video camera. Although the neural networks involved in visual visuo-lingual and visuo-facial perception largely overlapped, stronger motor and somatosensory activations were observed during visuo-lingual perception. In contrast, stronger activity was found in auditory and visual cortices during visuo-facial perception. Complementing these findings, activity in the left premotor cortex and in visual brain areas was found to correlate with visual recognition scores observed for visuo-lingual and visuo-facial speech stimuli, respectively, whereas visual activity correlated with RTs for both stimuli. These results suggest that unimodal and multimodal processing of lip and tongue speech actions rely on common sensorimotor brain areas. They also suggest that visual processing of audible but not visible movements induces motor and visual mental simulation of the perceived actions to facilitate recognition and/or to learn the association between auditory and visual signals. ■

show abstract

“…In addition, motor activation occurs during speech perception, particularly during adverse conditions Running head: COORDINATING SPEAKERS 5 (D'Ausilio, Bufalari, Salmas, & Fadiga, 2012). Finally, activation in the right cerebellum correlates with adaptation to distorted speech in a perceptual task (Guediche, Holt, Laurent, Lim, & Fiez, 2014), while rTMS of the right cerebellum delays predictive eye-movements to upcoming linguistic referents (Lesage, Morgan, Olson, Meyer, & Miall, 2012).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

How do speakers coordinate? Evidence for prediction in a joint word-replacement task

Gambi

Cop

Pickering

2015

Cortex

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We investigated whether speakers represent their partners' task in a joint naming paradigm. Two participants took turns in naming pictures; occasionally the (initial) picture was replaced by a different picture (target), signalling that they had to stop naming the initial picture. When the same participant had to name the target picture, he or she completed the name of the initial picture more often than when neither participant had to name the target picture. Crucially, when the other participant had to name the target picture, the first participant also completed the name of the initial picture more often than when neither participant named the target picture. However, the tendency to complete the initial name was weaker when the other participant had to name the target than when the same participant went on to name the target. We argue that speakers predict that their partner is about to respond using some, but not all, of the mechanisms they use when they prepare to speak.

show abstract

The role of the motor system in discriminating normal and degraded speech sounds

Cited by 111 publications

References 29 publications

The effect of speech distortion on the excitability of articulatory motor cortex

The effect of speech distortion on the excitability of articulatory motor cortex

Inside Speech: Multisensory and Modality-specific Processing of Tongue and Lip Speech Actions

How do speakers coordinate? Evidence for prediction in a joint word-replacement task

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About