A cross-language study on feedforward and feedback control of voice intensity in Chinese–English bilinguals

Cai, Xiao; Yin, Yulong; Zhang, Qingfang

doi:10.1017/s0142716420000223

Cited by 8 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 79 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…If the feedforward mode outweighs the feedback mode, pitch perturbations could be regarded as alien voices and thus shadowing-like following responses would be produced (i.e., they would be in the follower class). The relative weighting of feedback and feedforward modes has also been found in loudness perturbations on the first language (L1) and the second language (L2) production (Cai et al, 2020), where L1 speech production relied more on feedforward control (attenuated Lombard effect) and L2 speech production depended more on feedback control (enhanced Lombard effect).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 94%

“…When pitch perturbations were unpredictable (random), opposers’ opposing responses were smaller than switchers’ opposing responses. Large compensation in previous studies has been associated with overreliance on auditory feedback, which can be seen in autistic individuals with 16p11.2 Deletions ( Demopoulos et al, 2018 ), speakers with cerebellum degeneration ( Parrell et al, 2017 ), and L2 learners ( Ning et al, 2014 , 2015 ; Cai et al, 2020 ). This result suggests that though the feedback mode can be implemented in both opposers and switchers, the degree of reliance on auditory feedback was not the same.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Identifying distinct latent classes of pitch-shift response consistency: Evidence from manipulating the predictability of shift direction

Ning

2022

Front. Psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Auditory feedback plays an important role in regulating our vocal pitch. When pitch shifts suddenly appear in auditory feedback, the majority of the responses are opposing, correcting for the mismatch between perceived pitch and actual pitch. However, research has indicated that following responses to auditory perturbation could be common. This study attempts to explore the ways individual speakers would respond to pitch perturbation (using an opposing response or a following response) from trial to trial. Thirty-six native speakers of Mandarin produced the vowel /a/ while receiving perturbed pitch at a random time (500 ~ 700 ms) after vocal onset for a duration of 200 ms. Three blocks of 30 trials that differed in the pitch-shift stimulus direction were recorded in a randomized order: (a) the down-only condition where pitch was shifted downwards 250 cents; (b) the up-only condition where pitch was shifted upwards 250 cents; and (c) the random condition where downshifts and upshifts occurred randomly and were equally likely. The participants were instructed to ignore the pitch shifts. Results from the latent class analysis show that at the individual level across trials, 57% of participants were switchers, 28% were opposers, and 15% were followers. Our results support that speakers produce a mix of opposing and following responses when they respond to perturbed pitch. Specifically, the proportion of followers was conditional on the expectancy of pitch-shift stimulus direction: More followers were observed when the pitch-shift stimulus direction was predictable. Closer inspection of the levels of response consistency in different time phases shows that a particular mechanism (opposing or following) was initially implemented; the two mechanisms may alternate in the middle phase; and then finally, the pitch-shift response was featured as a particular mechanism near the end phase.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 94%