Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25080594›Full record

Trial reportThe Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience2014

Plasticity in the human speech motor system drives changes in speech perception.

Daniel R Lametti, Amélie Rochet-Capellan, Emily Neufeld, Douglas M Shiller, David J Ostry

Open access · bronzeAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 41 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
41citing papers in PubMed
3.8field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

41 citing papers in PubMed, 75 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Active inference and speech motor control.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2026
    Review
  2. Autonomic Arousal During Speech Production and Sensorimotor Adaptation.Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. The Role of Sensory Feedback in Developmental Stuttering: A Review.Neurobiology of language (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2021
    Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 3 institutions in 4 countries.

Daniel R LamettiDepartment of Psychology, McGill University, Montréal, Quebec, Canada H3A 1B1, Institute of Neurology, University College London, London, United Kingdom, WC1N 3BG.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1847-8451
Amélie Rochet-CapellanGIPSA-LAB, Département Parole and Cognition, CNRS and Grenoble Université, Grenoble, France.
Emily NeufeldDepartment of Psychology, McGill University, Montréal, Quebec, Canada H3A 1B1.
Douglas M ShillerSchool of Speech Pathology and Audiology, Université de Montréal, Montréal, Quebec, Canada H3N 1X7, Research Center, Sainte-Justine Hospital, Université de Montréal, Montréal, Quebec, Canada H3T 1C5, Centre for Research on Brain, Language & Music, Montréal, Canada H3G 2A8, and.
David J OstryDepartment of Psychology, McGill University, Montréal, Quebec, Canada H3A 1B1, Haskins Laboratories, New Haven, Connecticut 06511 david.ostry@mcgill.ca.
McGill University · CAGrenoble Images Parole Signal Automatique · FRUniversité de Montréal · CA

Funding

Speech Motor Learning and Sensory Plasticity in Children and AdultsR01DC012502 · NIDCD · HASKINS LABORATORIES, INC. · PI OSTRY, DAVID J · 2012 to 2016
$2.5M
NIDCD NIH HHS R01 DC012502
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Recent studies of human speech motor learning suggest that learning is accompanied by changes in auditory perception. But what drives the perceptual change? Is it a consequence of changes in the motor system? Or is it a result of sensory inflow during learning? Here, subjects participated in a speech motor-learning task involving adaptation to altered auditory feedback and they were subsequently tested for perceptual change. In two separate experiments, involving two different auditory perceptual continua, we show that changes in the speech motor system that accompany learning drive changes in auditory speech perception. Specifically, we obtained changes in speech perception when adaptation to altered auditory feedback led to speech production that fell into the phonetic range of the speech perceptual tests. However, a similar change in perception was not observed when the auditory feedback that subjects' received during learning fell into the phonetic range of the perceptual tests. This indicates that the central motor outflow associated with vocal sensorimotor adaptation drives changes to the perceptual classification of speech sounds.

Indexed as

Acoustic StimulationAdolescentAdultAuditory PathwaysFeedback, SensoryFemaleHumansMaleMotor ActivityPsychoacousticsSpeechSpeech PerceptionSpeech Production MeasurementVocabularyYoung Adultactionmotor learningperceptionplasticityspeech

Identifiers

PMID25080594
PMCPMC4115140
OpenAlexW2076304467

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.