Potential interactions among linguistic, autonomic, and motor factors in speech

Abstract

Though anecdotal reports link certain speech disorders to increases in autonomic arousal, few studies have described the relationship between arousal and speech processes. Additionally, it is unclear how increases in arousal may interact with other cognitive-linguistic processes to affect speech motor control. In this experiment we examine potential interactions between autonomic arousal, linguistic processing, and speech motor coordination in adults and children. Autonomic responses (heart rate, finger pulse volume, tonic skin conductance, and phasic skin conductance) were recorded simultaneously with upper and lower lip movements during speech. The lip aperture variability (LA variability index) across multiple repetitions of sentences that varied in length and syntactic complexity was calculated under low- and high-arousal conditions. High arousal conditions were elicited by performance of the Stroop color word task. Children had significantly higher lip aperture variability index values across all speaking tasks, indicating more variable speech motor coordination. Increases in syntactic complexity and utterance length were associated with increases in speech motor coordination variability in both speaker groups. There was a significant effect of Stroop task, which produced increases in autonomic arousal and increased speech motor variability in both adults and children. These results provide novel evidence that high arousal levels can influence speech motor control in both adults and children.

A Lag in Speech Motor Coordination During Sentence Production Is Associated With Stuttering Persistence in Young Children

“…Decreasing variability in articulation has been associated with advances in language development (Grigos, 2009). The linguistic demands of increasing sentence length and syntactic complexity conversely have a destabilizing effect on speech motor control in both typical children (Maner et al, 2000) and adults (Kleinow & Smith, 2006).…”

“…As shown in Table 3, short sentences contained six words (eight syllables) and long sentences contained nine words (11 syllables). Sentences that are syntactically complex included a late-developing subject relative clause, previously shown to influence variability in speech motor coordination (Kleinow & Smith, 2006). The long sentences differed from their short counterparts through the addition of a nonobligatory adjunct.…”

Eletromiografia e diadococinesia: estudo com crianças fluentes e com gagueira

“…The production of syllables, particularly, involves the necessary rapid and precise control for the transition between the opening, closing and positioning in different configurations of the vocal tract. [1][2][3][4][5][6][7] Like any other complex motor activity, speech is subject to instabilities -i.e. speech disruptionsthat can occur in the different levels of speech processing, having as possible causes congenital or acquired factors.…”

Diadococinesia sequencial em crianças fluentes e com gagueira desenvolvimental persistente: análise da velocidade e tipo do erro da consoante alvo

“…To understand speech production, it is necessary to distinguish between motor control of speech and nonspeech (non-linguistic oral motor behaviors). Such a distinction involves the basic concept that the underlying mechanism of motor actions is controlled by a process aimed towards a final goal or product (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9) . From the perspective of dynamic systems theory, specific tasks demand of skeletal and neuromuscular components that the planned motor act be a single unit, with a self-organized pattern, in synergistic balance, interacting with other units, forming a system that organizes and dissolves spontaneously, depending on the goal to be achieved (3) .…”

“…Research on speech production and its relation with other facial motor functions has not yet explained if speech movements are, indeed, controlled by a universal neural arrangement (whose motor commands differ in the goal to be attained) depending on the type of task, or if they stem from a specific motor formulation, provided in levels and engendered for the production of the desired emission (the same apparatus is used, but with specific, complex, and sophisticated commands of force, precision, flow, and compliance) (1,2,3,4,5,6) . Speech motor production, in normal conditions, involves temporal control of events, in which motor command and vocal tract configuration are controlled by an internal representation which directs articulatory direction, harmony, precision of the phonetic transition, and the compensatory structure in case of disturbances that may compromise the precision of the speech signal (audited and somatosensory feedback control), generated in real time, to correct articulatory deviations that may cause discrepancies of fluency, speed, and smoothness of speech flow (6,7,8,9) . Fluency may be considered a descriptor of speech performance, a product of language, transformed into movements and sounds, in temporal, sequential order pertinent to each natural language.…”