ArticlePloS one2021
Can we use the internet to study speech production? Yes we can! Evidence contrasting online versus laboratory naming latencies and errors.
Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 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
17 citing papers in PubMed.
- The activation of lexico-syntactic features in semi-lexical nouns.Psychological research · 2026Article
- Age-Related Differences in Naming Latency Variability.Journal of cognition · 2026Article
- Praditor: A DBSCAN-based automation for speech onset detection.Behavior research methods · 2025Article
- Influence of Language Dominance on Crosslinguistic and Nonlinguistic Interference Resolution in Bilinguals.Bilingualism (Cambridge, England) · 2025Article
- Moving rhythmically can facilitate naturalistic speech perception in a noisy environment.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2025Article
- Timing precision of the Individual Differences in Dutch Language Skills (IDLaS-NL) test battery.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2025Article
- Individual differences in online research: Comparing lab-based and online administration of a psycholinguistic battery of linguistic and domain-general skills.Behavior research methods · 2024Article
- Effects of irrelevant unintelligible and intelligible background speech on spoken language production.Quarterly journal of experimental psychology (2006) · 2024Article
- The role of answer content and length when preparing answers to questions.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Response planning during question-answering: does deciding what to say involve deciding how to say it?Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2024Article
- Semantic and Syntactic Predictions in Reading Aloud: Are Good Predictors Good Statistical Learners?Journal of cognition · 2024Article
- Are Faster Participants Always Faster? Assessing Reliability of Participants' Mean Response Speed in Picture Naming.Journal of cognition · 2024Article
- Phonetic accommodation in non-native directed speech supports L2 word learning and pronunciation.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Internet-based language production research with overt articulation: Proof of concept, challenges, and practical advice.Behavior research methods · 2022Article
- Examining long-term repetition priming effects in spoken word recognition using computer mouse tracking.Frontiers in psychology · 2022Article
- Semantic Cues Modulate Children's and Adults' Processing of Audio-Visual Face Mask Speech.Frontiers in psychology · 2022Article
- The Same Ultra-Rapid Parallel Brain Dynamics Underpin the Production and Perception of Speech.Cerebral cortex communications · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The closure of cognitive psychology labs around the world due to the COVID-19 pandemic has prevented in-person testing. This has caused a particular challenge for speech production researchers, as before the pandemic there were no studies demonstrating that reliable overt speech production data could be collected via the internet. Here, we present evidence that both accurate and reliable overt articulation data can be collected from internet-based speech production experiments. We tested 100 participants in a picture naming paradigm, where we manipulated the word and phonotactic frequency of the picture names. We compared our results to a lab-based study conducted on different participants which used the same materials and design. We found a significant word frequency effect but no phonotactic frequency effect, fully replicating the lab-based results. Effect sizes were similar between experiments, but with significantly longer latencies in the internet-collected data. We found no evidence that internet upload or download speed affected either naming latencies or errors. In addition, we carried out a permutation-style analysis which recommends a minimum sample size of 40 participants for online production paradigms. In sum, our study demonstrates that internet-based testing of speech production is a feasible and promising endeavour, with less challenges than many researchers (anecdotally) assumed.
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.