Abstract

Speaking is a complex motor skill which requires near instantaneous integration of sensory and motor-related information. Current theory hypothesizes a complex interplay between motor and auditory processes during speech production, involving the online comparison of the speech output with an internally generated forward model. To examine the neural correlates of this intricate interplay between sensory and motor processes, the current study uses altered auditory feedback (AAF) in combination with magnetoencephalography (MEG). Participants vocalized the vowel/e/and heard auditory feedback that was temporarily pitch-shifted by only 25 cents, while neural activity was recorded with MEG. As a control condition, participants also heard the recordings of the same auditory feedback that they heard in the first half of the experiment, now without vocalizing. The participants were not aware of any perturbation of the auditory feedback. We found auditory cortical areas responded more strongly to the pitch shifts during vocalization. In addition, auditory feedback perturbation resulted in spectral power increases in the θ and lower β bands, predominantly in sensorimotor areas. These results are in line with current models of speech production, suggesting auditory cortical areas are involved in an active comparison between a forward model's prediction and the actual sensory input. Subsequently, these areas interact with motor areas to generate a motor response. Furthermore, the results suggest that θ and β power increases support auditory-motor interaction, motor error detection and/or sensory prediction processing.

Highlights

  • Speaking is a remarkably complex motor skill

  • The current study investigates the neural underpinnings of sensorimotor integration during speech production

  • The current study looks at responses in the lower frequency range to a much smaller pitch shift

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Speaking is a remarkably complex motor skill. We speak at a rate of often more than 10 speech sounds per second, each of which require accurate coordination of more than 100 different muscles. It turns out that speakers usually compensate for these manipulations by changing their speech in the opposite direction (that is, by lowering the pitch, or by increasing the frequency in the first formant, which results in a change in vowel quality). This compensatory response occurs even when participants are told to ignore the altered feedback (Keough et al, 2013).

Present address
Materials and methods
F Fbaseline
Results
Discussion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call