ArticleJournal of neurophysiology2020
Contribution of sensory memory to speech motor learning.
Article in Journal of neurophysiology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Population coding of time-varying sounds in the nonlemniscal inferior colliculus.Journal of neurophysiology · 2024Article
- Population coding of time-varying sounds in the non-lemniscal Inferior Colliculus.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2023Article
- The effects of continuous oromotor activity on speech motor learning: speech biomechanics and neurophysiologic correlates.Experimental brain research · 2021Article
- Neural Development of Speech Sensorimotor Learning.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2021Article
- Effects of Visual Attentional Load on the Tactile Sensory Memory Indexed by Somatosensory Mismatch Negativity.Frontiers in neuroinformatics · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Speech learning requires precise motor control, but it likewise requires transient storage of information to enable the adjustment of upcoming movements based on the success or failure of previous attempts. The contribution of somatic sensory memory for limb position has been documented in work on arm movement; however, in speech, the sensory support for speech production comes from both somatosensory and auditory inputs, and accordingly sensory memory for either or both of sounds and somatic inputs might contribute to learning. In the present study, adaptation to altered auditory feedback was used as an experimental model of speech motor learning. Participants also underwent tests of both auditory and somatic sensory memory. We found that although auditory memory for speech sounds is better than somatic memory for speechlike facial skin deformations, somatic sensory memory predicts adaptation, whereas auditory sensory memory does not. Thus even though speech relies substantially on auditory inputs and in the present manipulation adaptation requires the minimization of auditory error, it is somatic inputs that provide the memory support for learning.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.