Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33639824›Full record

ArticleThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America2021

Speech compensation responses and sensorimotor adaptation to formant feedback perturbations.

Inez Raharjo, Hardik Kothare, Srikantan S Nagarajan, John F Houde

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing 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

14 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Active inference and speech motor control.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2026
    Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Neurophysiological Evidence of Sensory Prediction Errors Driving Speech Sensorimotor Adaptation.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2025
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Perturbing the consistency of auditory feedback in speech.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2022
    Article
  14. Review
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

4 authors.

Inez RaharjoUniversity of California, Berkeley and University of California, San Francisco, Graduate Program in Bioengineering.
Hardik KothareUniversity of California, Berkeley and University of California, San Francisco, Graduate Program in Bioengineering.ORCID s0000000343050334
Srikantan S NagarajanBiomagnetic Imaging Laboratory, Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California 94143, USA.
John F HoudeSpeech Neuroscience Laboratory, Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California 94143, USA.

Funding

The role of the cerebellum in speechR01DC017091 · NIDCD · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI John Francis Houde, RICHARD IVRY · 2019 to 2026
$4.5M
Dynamic Brain Imaging of Speech in Primary Progressive AphasiaR01NS100440 · NINDS · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI MARIA LUISA GORNO TEMPINI, John Francis Houde · 2017 to 2026
$3.6M
Coincidence and continuity: uncovering the neural basis of auditory object perceptionR01DC017690 · NIDCD · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI BALASUBRAMANIAN, VIJAY, COHEN, YALE E · 2019 to 2023
$2.2M
Neuroimaging of Speech Motor ControlR01DC010145 · NIDCD · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI HOUDE, JOHN FRANCIS · 2010 to 2014
$1.8M
Imaging sensorimotor adaptation and compensation of speechR01DC013979 · NIDCD · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI HOUDE, JOHN FRANCIS, NAGARAJAN, SRIKANTAN S. · 2014 to 2018
$1.7M
Role of auditory feedback in speech motor control in Alzheimer's diseaseR01DC017696 · NIDCD · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI HOUDE, JOHN FRANCIS, NAGARAJAN, SRIKANTAN S. · 2018 to 2020
$1.5M
NIDCD NIH HHS R01 DC010145NIDCD NIH HHS R01 DC013979NIDCD NIH HHS R01 DC017690NIDCD NIH HHS R01 DC017696NINDS NIH HHS R01 NS100440
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Control of speech formants is important for the production of distinguishable speech sounds and is achieved with both feedback and learned feedforward control. However, it is unclear whether the learning of feedforward control involves the mechanisms of feedback control. Speakers have been shown to compensate for unpredictable transient mid-utterance perturbations of pitch and loudness feedback, demonstrating online feedback control of these speech features. To determine whether similar feedback control mechanisms exist in the production of formants, responses to unpredictable vowel formant feedback perturbations were examined. Results showed similar within-trial compensatory responses to formant perturbations that were presented at utterance onset and mid-utterance. The relationship between online feedback compensation to unpredictable formant perturbations and sensorimotor adaptation to consistent formant perturbations was further examined. Within-trial online compensation responses were not correlated with across-trial sensorimotor adaptation. A detailed analysis of within-trial time course dynamics across trials during sensorimotor adaptation revealed that across-trial sensorimotor adaptation responses did not result from an incorporation of within-trial compensation response. These findings suggest that online feedback compensation and sensorimotor adaptation are governed by distinct neural mechanisms. These findings have important implications for models of speech motor control in terms of how feedback and feedforward control mechanisms are implemented.

Indexed as

SpeechSpeech PerceptionFeedbackFeedback, SensoryPhonetics

Identifiers

PMID33639824
PMCPMC7892200

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.