ArticleFrontiers in human neuroscience2025
Delayed auditory feedback increases speech production variability in typically fluent adults but has the opposite effect in stuttering adults.
Article in Frontiers in human neuroscience, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Working Memory Modulates Auditory Perceptual Sensitivity During Speech Planning.Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR · 2026Article
- The complex impact of auditory error direction, magnitude, and exposure on corrective responses.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2025Article
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
Purpose: Extensive evidence indicates that auditory-motor integration during speech production is inefficient in individuals who stutter and that speaking with delayed auditory feedback (DAF) increases speech fluency in this population. However, the exact Method: We extracted acoustic measures from audio recordings made during a prior study that included 12 right-handed adults who stutter and 12 age-, sex-, and handedness-matched nonstuttering adults. Participants produced front vowels in the context of monosyllabic consonant-vowel-consonant words in conditions where they spoke with either normal auditory feedback (NAF) or 100-ms DAF. For each participant in each condition, we calculated trial-to-trial formant variability to assess feedforward processes. Results: Relative to nonstuttering adults, stuttering adults generally showed greater trial-to-trial formant variability. DAF had a differential influence on trial-to-trial formant variability, increasing it for non-stuttering adults but decreasing it for stuttering adults. Conclusion: These findings suggest that stuttering adults generated more variable motor commands than nonstuttering adults when speaking with NAF, but that speaking with DAF decreased variability in the stuttering group, even though it increased variability in the nonstuttering group. One possible interpretation of these findings is that stuttering modulates the sensorimotor system's processing of auditory errors, specifically influencing how significantly these errors are weighted when the sensorimotor system determines its responses to the errors.
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.