Exploring semantic and phonological picture–word priming in adults who stutter using event-related potentials

Abstract

Objective Our aim was to investigate how semantic and phonological information is processed in adults who stutter (AWS) preparing to name pictures, following-up a report that event-related potentials (ERPs) in AWS evidenced atypical semantic picture-word priming (Maxfield et al., 2010). Methods Fourteen AWS and 14 typically-fluent adults (TFA) participated. Pictures, named at a delay, were followed by probe words. Design elements not used in Maxfield et al. (2010) let us evaluate both phonological and semantic picture-word priming. Results TFA evidenced typical priming effects in probe-elicited ERPs. AWS evidenced diminished Semantic priming, and reverse Phonological N400 priming. Conclusions Results point to atypical processing of semantic and phonological information in AWS. Discussion considers whether AWS ERP effects reflect unstable activation of target label semantic and phonological representations, strategic inhibition of target label phonological neighbors, and/or phonological label-probe competition. Significance Results raise questions about how mechanisms that regulate activation spreading operate in AWS.

Speech preparation in adults with persistent developmental stuttering

“…Previous experiments in people who stutter have examined auditory processing while covertly reading (Salmelin R, Schnitzler A, Schmitz F, Jancke L, Witte OW et al, 1998), in response to ones’ own voice when speaking (Beal et al, 2010, 2011; Liotti et al, 2010) and during picture recognition and delayed production (Maxfield, Huffman, Frisch, & Hinckley, 2010; Maxfield, Pizon-Moore, Frisch, & Constantine, 2012). The studies by Maxfield et al (2010, 2012) found that long latency (> 400 ms) components related to semantic and phonological activation differed between adults who stutter and fluent controls. Taken together with the above observations, our new results indicate that auditory cortical processing can distinguish fluent men from those who stutter, and support the notion that atypical auditory processing is a prominent feature in stuttering.…”

Attention demands of language production in adults who stutter

“…This experiment was conducted in the same facility as our previous work (Maxfield et al, 2010, 2012, 2015), thus involving many of the same recording tools and settings. The experiment took place in a sound-attenuating booth contained within a laboratory.…”

“…As reviewed in (Maxfield, 2015; Maxfield et al, 2010, 2012, 2014), psycholinguistic research has produced some evidence that both lexical-semantic and phonological processing may operate differently in AWS versus TFA, including evidence that these processes may be atypically resource-demanding in AWS. For example, some studies using word association, picture naming, vocabulary and other relatively simple language production tasks have produced evidence that the accuracy or efficiency with which AWS retrieve conceptually-appropriate words may be diminished (Crowe and Kroll, 1991; Wingate, 1988; Newman and Ratner, 2007; Pellowski, 2011; Watson et al, 1994; Bosshardt and Fransen, 1996).…”

“…Recently, the first author and colleagues began investigating real-time language production in AWS using brain event-related potentials (ERPs) (Maxfield et al, 2010; 2012, 2014). The aim of this work has been to extend psycholinguistic research with AWS by investigating ERP components that, in principle, index language and cognitive processing more precisely than behavioral measures such as naming reaction time (RT) and accuracy.…”

“…In Maxfield et al (2012), we investigated whether phonological processing in picture naming operates similarly in AWS versus TFA, also using ERPs recorded in a picture-word priming task. On most trials of that experiment, a picture was presented followed 150 ms later by an auditory probe word, and then a cue to name the picture 1500 ms later.…”