Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32738430›Full record

ArticleNeuroscience2020

Exposure to Auditory Feedback Delay while Speaking Induces Perceptual Habituation but does not Mitigate the Disruptive Effect of Delay on Speech Auditory-motor Learning.

Douglas M Shiller, Takashi Mitsuya, Ludo Max

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Neuroscience, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Neurophysiological Evidence of Sensory Prediction Errors Driving Speech Sensorimotor Adaptation.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Auditory Feedback Is Used for Adaptation and Compensation in Speech Timing.Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR · 2021
    Article
  10. Article
  11. 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

3 authors.

Douglas M ShillerÉcole d'orthophonie et d'audiologie, Universite de Montréal, Montreal, Canada; CHU Sainte-Justine Research Centre, Montreal, Canada; Centre for Research on Brain, Language, and Music, Montreal, Canada.
Takashi MitsuyaDepartment of Speech and Hearing Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, USA.
Ludo MaxDepartment of Speech and Hearing Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, USA; Haskins Laboratories, New Haven, USA. Electronic address: LudoMax@uw.edu.

Funding

Dynamic bidirectional sensorimotor interactions in stutteringR01DC017444 · NIDCD · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI MAX, LUDO · 2019 to 2023
$1.6M
Adaptive sensorimotor learning in speech productionR01DC014510 · NIDCD · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI MAX, LUDO · 2015 to 2019
$1.5M
CIHR MOP-137001NIDCD NIH HHS R01 DC014510NIDCD NIH HHS R01 DC017444
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Perceiving the sensory consequences of our actions with a delay alters the interpretation of these afferent signals and impacts motor learning. For reaching movements, delayed visual feedback of hand position reduces the rate and extent of visuomotor adaptation, but substantial adaptation still occurs. Moreover, the detrimental effect of visual feedback delay on reach motor learning-selectively affecting its implicit component-can be mitigated by prior habituation to the delay. Auditory-motor learning for speech has been reported to be more sensitive to feedback delay, and it remains unknown whether habituation to auditory delay reduces its negative impact on learning. We investigated whether 30 min of exposure to auditory delay during speaking (a) affects the subjective perception of delay, and (b) mitigates its disruptive effect on speech auditory-motor learning. During a speech adaptation task with real-time perturbation of vowel spectral properties, participants heard this frequency-shifted feedback with no delay, 75 ms delay, or 115 ms delay. In the delay groups, 50% of participants had been exposed to the delay throughout a preceding 30-minute block of speaking whereas the remaining participants completed this block without delay. Although habituation minimized awareness of the delay, no improvement in adaptation to the spectral perturbation was observed. Thus, short-term habituation to auditory feedback delays is not effective in reducing the negative impact of delay on speech auditory-motor adaptation. Combined with previous findings, the strong negative effect of delay and the absence of an influence of delay awareness suggest the involvement of predominantly implicit learning mechanisms in speech.

Indexed as

SpeechSpeech PerceptionAdaptation, PhysiologicalFeedbackFeedback, SensoryHabituation, PsychophysiologicHumansadaptationauditory feedbackdelayhabituationsensorimotor learningspeech

Identifiers

PMID32738430
PMCPMC7530077

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.