ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2026
Sensory basis of speech motor learning and memory.
Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Sensory basis of speech motor learning and memory.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Changes to speech offer a quantifiable means to assess speech motor learning, and the resulting memory is thought to be motor in nature. Here, we evaluate this idea and show instead that memory for speech movements has a sensory basis. Speech motor learning, using altered auditory feedback, provides an experimental model to address this question as it involves auditory, somatosensory, and motor components to learning. Transcranial magnetic stimulation was used to disrupt auditory (superior temporal gyrus, STG), posterior somatosensory (S1), or motor (M1) cortex following speech motor learning. Retention tests were conducted 24 h later. It was found that following disruption of either STG or S1, motor memory retention was impaired whereas disruption of M1 led to retention that was no different than that of a no TMS control condition. The effects of disruption were specific to speech motor learning and did not interfere with speech production per se. Taken together, the findings support the notion that plasticity in the sensory cortex, both auditory and somatosensory, is necessary for speech motor learning and memory. In speech, changes to sensory systems enable the production of newly learned movements.
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.