Inhibitory modulation of speech trajectories: Evidence from a vowel-modified Stroop task

References

• Alderete, J., Baese-Berk, M., Leung, K., & Goldrick, M. (2021). Cascading activation in phonological planning and articulation: Evidence from spontaneous speech errors. Cognition, 210, 104577. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2020.104577
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baese-Berk, M., & Goldrick, M. (2009). Mechanisms of interaction in speech production. Language and Cognitive Processes, 24(4), 527–554. https://doi.org/10.1080/01690960802299378
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bates, D., Maechler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S. (2015). Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software, 67(1), 1–48. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v067.i01
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Benjamini, Y., & Hochberg, Y. (1995). Controlling the false discovery rate: A practical and powerful approach to multiple testing. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B (Methodological), 57(1), 289–300. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2517-6161.1995.tb02031.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berent, I., & Marom, M. (2005). Skeletal structure of printed words: Evidence from the Stroop task. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 31(2), 328. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.31.2.328
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boersma, P., & Weenink, D. (2021). Praat: Doing phonetics by computer. http://www.praat.org/.
   Google Scholar
• Bohland, J. W., Bullock, D., & Guenther, F. H. (2010). Neural representations and mechanisms for the performance of simple speech sequences. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 22(7), 1504–1529. https://doi.org/10.1162/jocn.2009.21306
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Booth, J. R., Perfetti, C. A., & MacWhinney, B. (1999). Quick, automatic, and general activation of orthographic and phonological representations in young readers. Developmental Psychology, 35(1), 3. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.35.1.3
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brainard, D. H. (1997). The psychophysics toolbox. Spatial Vision, 10(4), 433–436. https://doi.org/10.1163/156856897X00357
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Buz, E., Tanenhaus, M. K., & Jaeger, T. F. (2016). Dynamically adapted context-specific hyper-articulation: Feedback from interlocutors affects speakers’ subsequent pronunciations. Journal of Memory and Language, 89, 68–86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2015.12.009
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clopper, C. G., & Tamati, T. N. (2014). Effects of local lexical competition and regional dialect on vowel production. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 136(1), 1–4. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.4883478
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cutler, A. (1988). The perfect speech error. In Language, speech and mind: Studies in honor of Victoria A. Fromkin (pp. 209–223). Croom Helm.
   Google Scholar
• Dennis, I., & Newstead, S. E. (1981). Is phonological recoding under strategic control? Memory & Cognition, 9(5), 472–477. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03202341
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Drake, E., & Corley, M. (2015). Articulatory imaging implicates prediction during spoken language comprehension. Memory & Cognition, 43(8), 1136–1147. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-015-0530-6
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dromey, C., & Bates, E. (2005). Speech interactions with linguistic, cognitive, and visuomotor tasks. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 48(2), 295–305. https://doi.org/10.1044/1092-4388(2005/020)
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Duque, J., Greenhouse, I., Labruna, L., & Ivry, R. B. (2017). Physiological markers of motor inhibition during human behavior. Trends in Neurosciences, 40(4), 219–236. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tins.2017.02.006
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Erlhagen, W., & Schöner, G. (2002). Dynamic field theory of movement preparation. Psychological Review, 109(3), 545. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.109.3.545
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Flemming, E. (2004). Contrast and perceptual distinctiveness. In B. Hayes, R. Kirchner, & D. Steriade (Eds.), Phonetically-based phonology (pp. 232–267). Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Fox, J., & Weisberg, S. (2019). An {R} companion to applied regression (3rd ed.). Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Fox, N. P., Reilly, M., & Blumstein, S. E. (2015). Phonological neighborhood competition affects spoken word production irrespective of sentential context. Journal of Memory and Language, 83, 97–117. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2015.04.002
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Frisch, S. A., & Wright, R. (2002). The phonetics of phonological speech errors: An acoustic analysis of slips of the tongue. Journal of Phonetics, 30(2), 139–162. https://doi.org/10.1006/jpho.2002.0176
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Georgopoulos, A. P., Schwartz, A. B., & Kettner, R. E. (1986). Neuronal population coding of movement direction. Science, 233(4771), 1416–1419. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.3749885
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goldrick, M., & Blumstein, S. E. (2006). Cascading activation from phonological planning to articulatory processes: Evidence from tongue twisters. Language and Cognitive Processes, 21(6), 649–683. https://doi.org/10.1080/01690960500181332
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goldrick, M., Keshet, J., Gustafson, E., Heller, J., & Needle, J. (2016). Automatic analysis of slips of the tongue: Insights into the cognitive architecture of speech production. Cognition, 149, 31–39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2016.01.002
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goldstein, L., Pouplier, M., Chen, L., Saltzman, E., & Byrd, D. (2007). Dynamic action units slip in speech production errors. Cognition, 103(3), 386–412. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2006.05.010
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guenther, F. H. (1995). Speech sound acquisition, coarticulation, and rate effects in a neural network model of speech production. Psychological Review, 102(3), 594. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.102.3.594
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harley, T. A. (1984). A critique of top-down independent levels models of speech production: Evidence from non-plan-internal speech errors. Cognitive Science, 8(3), 191–219. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog0803_1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harnishfeger, K. K. (1995). The development of cognitive inhibition: Theories, definitions, and research evidence. In F. N. Dempster, & C. J. Brainerd (Eds.), Interference and inhibition in cognition (pp. 175–204). Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Harnsberger, J. D., Wright, R., & Pisoni, D. B. (2008). A new method for eliciting three speaking styles in the laboratory. Speech Communication, 50(4), 323–336. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.specom.2007.11.001
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hothorn, T., Bretz, F., & Westfall, P. (2008). Simultaneous inference in general parametric models. Biometrical Journal, 50(3), 346–363. https://doi.org/10.1002/bimj.200810425
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Houghton, G., & Tipper, S. P. (1999). Attention and the control of action: An investigation of the effects of selection on population coding of hand and eye movement. In D. Heinke, G. W. Humphreys, & A. Olson (Eds.), Connectionist models in cognitive neuroscience (pp. 283–298). Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Jacewicz, E., & Fox, R. A. (2013). Cross-dialectal differences in dynamic formant patterns in American English vowels. In G. S. Morrison, & P. F. Assmann (Eds.), Vowel inherent spectral change (pp. 177–198). Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Jescheniak, J. D., & Schriefers, H. (2001). Priming effects from phonologically related distractors in picture-word interference. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 54(2), 371–382. https://doi.org/10.1080/713755981
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kassambara, A. (2021). rstatix: Pipe-friendly framework for basic statistical tests. R package version 0.7.0. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=rstatix.
   Google Scholar
• Kello, C. T., Plaut, D. C., & MacWhinney, B. (2000). The task dependence of staged versus cascaded processing: An empirical and computational study of Stroop interference in speech perception. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 129(3), 340. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.129.3.340
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kleinow, J., & Smith, A. (2006). Potential interactions among linguistic, autonomic, and motor factors in speech. Developmental Psychobiology, 48(4), 275–287. https://doi.org/10.1002/dev.20141
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kurowski, K., & Blumstein, S. E. (2016). Phonetic basis of phonemic paraphasias in aphasia: Evidence for cascading activation. Cortex, 75, 193. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cortex.2015.12.005
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kuzmina, E., & Weekes, B. S. (2017). Role of cognitive control in language deficits in different types of aphasia. Aphasiology, 31(7), 765–792. https://doi.org/10.1080/02687038.2016.1263383
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kuznetsova, A., Brockhoff, P. B., & Christensen, R. H. B. (2017). lmerTest Package: Tests in linear mixed effects models. Journal of Statistical Software, 82(13), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v082.i13
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Labov, W., Ash, S., & Boberg, C. (2006). The atlas of north American English: Phonetics, phonology and sound change. Walter de Gruyter.
   Google Scholar
• Lindblom, B. (1986). Phonetic universals in vowel systems. In J. J. Ohala, & J. J. Jaeger (Eds.), Experimental phonology. Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lo, S., & Andrews, S. (2015). To transform or not to transform: Using generalized linear mixed models to analyse reaction time data. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 1171. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01171
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lupker, S. J. (1979). The semantic nature of response competition in the picture-word interference task. Memory & Cognition, 7(6), 485–495. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03198265
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• MacKay, D. G. (1970). Spoonerisms: The structure of errors in the serial order of speech. Neuropsychologia, 8(3), 323–350. https://doi.org/10.1016/0028-3932(70)90078-3
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• MacLeod, C. M. (1991). Half a century of research on the Stroop effect: An integrative review. Psychological Bulletin, 109(2). https://doi.org/10.1037//0033-2909.109.2.163
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• MacPherson, M. K., Abur, D., & Stepp, C. E. (2017). Acoustic measures of voice and physiologic measures of autonomic arousal during speech as a function of cognitive load. Journal of Voice, 31(4), 504-e1–e9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2016.10.021
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marmurek, H. H., Proctor, C., & Javor, A. (2006). Stroop-like serial position effects in color naming of words and nonwords. Experimental Psychology, 53(2), 105–110. https://doi.org/10.1027/1618-3169.53.2.105
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McAuliffe, M., Socolof, M., Mihuc, S., Wagner, M., & Sonderegger, M. (2017, August). Montreal Forced Aligner: Trainable text-speech alignment using Kaldi. Interspeech, 2017, 498–502.
   Google Scholar
• McMillan, C. T., Corley, M., & Lickley, R. J. (2009). Articulatory evidence for feedback and competition in speech production. Language and Cognitive Processes, 24(1), 44–66. https://doi.org/10.1080/01690960801998236
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meyer, D. E., & Gordon, P. C. (1985). Speech production: Motor programming of phonetic features. Journal of Memory and Language, 24(1), 3–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-596X(85)90013-0
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mink, J. W. (1996). The basal ganglia: Focused selection and inhibition of competing motor programs. Progress in Neurobiology, 50(4), 381–425. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0301-0082(96)00042-1
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mousikou, P., Roon, K. D., & Rastle, K. (2015). Masked primes activate feature representations in reading aloud. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 41(3), 636. https://doi.org/10.1037/xlm0000072
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mowrey, R. A., & MacKay, I. R. (1990). Phonological primitives: Electromyographic speech error evidence. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 88(3), 1299–1312. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.399706
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Niziolek, C. A., & Guenther, F. H. (2013). Vowel category boundaries enhance cortical and behavioral responses to speech feedback alterations. Journal of Neuroscience, 33(29), 12090–12098. https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.1008-13.2013
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Niziolek, C. A., & Houde, J. (2015). Wave_Viewer: First release. https://doi.org/10.5281/ZENODO.13839.
   Google Scholar
• Oostwoud Wijdenes, L., Ivry, R. B., & Bays, P. M. (2016). Competition between movement plans increases motor variability: Evidence of a shared resource for movement planning. Journal of Neurophysiology, 116(3), 1295–1303. https://doi.org/10.1152/jn.00113.2016
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• O’Seaghdha, P. G., Dell, G. S., Peterson, R. R., & Juliano, C. (1992). Models of form-related priming in comprehension and production. In R. G. Reilly, & N. E. Sharkey (Eds.), Connectionist approaches to natural language processing. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• O’Shaughnessy, D. (1987). Speech communication: Human and machine. Addison-Wesley.
   Google Scholar
• Perret, E. (1974). The left frontal lobe of man and the suppression of habitual responses in verbal categorical behaviour. Neuropsychologia, 12(3), 323–330. https://doi.org/10.1016/0028-3932(74)90047-5
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pompon, R. H., McNeil, M. R., Spencer, K. A., & Kendall, D. L. (2015). Intentional and reactive inhibition during spoken-word Stroop task performance in people with aphasia. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 58(3), 767–780. https://doi.org/10.1044/2015_JSLHR-L-14-0063
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pouplier, M., Chen, L., Goldstein, L., & Byrd, D. (1999). Kinematic evidence for the existence of gradient speech errors. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 106(4), 2242–2242. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.427638
   Google Scholar
• Rapp, B., & Goldrick, M. (2000). Discreteness and interactivity in spoken word production. Psychological Review, 107(3), 460. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.107.3.460
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rayner, K., Sereno, S. C., Lesch, M. F., & Pollatsek, A. (1995). Phonological codes are automatically activated during reading: Evidence from an eye movement priming paradigm. Psychological Science, 6(1), 26–32. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.1995.tb00300.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• R Core Team. (2021). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. https://www.R-project.org/.
   Google Scholar
• Schade, U., & Berg, T. (1992). The role of inhibition in a spreading-activation model of language production. II. The simulational perspective. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 21(6), 435–462. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01067523
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scherer, K. R., Grandjean, D., Johnstone, T., Klasmeyer, G., & Bänziger, T. (2002, September). Acoustic correlates of task load and stress. Interspeech, 2002.
   Google Scholar
• Sevald, C. A., & Dell, G. S. (1994). The sequential cuing effect in speech production. Cognition, 53(2), 91–127. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(94)90067-1
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sheliga, B. M., Riggio, L., & Rizzolatti, G. (1994). Orienting of attention and eye movements. Experimental Brain Research, 98(3), 507–522. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00233988
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Simonini, R. C. (1956). Phonemic and analogic lapses in radio and television speech. American Speech, 31(4), 252–263. https://doi.org/10.2307/453412
   Google Scholar
• Sohn, Y. H., & Hallett, M. (2004). Surround inhibition in human motor system. Experimental Brain Research, 158(4), 397–404.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stern, M. C., Chaturvedi, M., & Shaw, J. A. (2022). A dynamic neural field model of phonetic trace effects in speech errors. Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society (Vol. 44, No. 44).
   Google Scholar
• Stern, M. C., & Shaw, J. A. (2023). Neural inhibition during speech planning contributes to contrastive hyperarticulation. Journal of Memory and Language, 132, 104443. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2023.104443
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stroop, J. R. (1935). Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 18(6), 643. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0054651
   Google Scholar
• Stuss, D. T., Floden, D., Alexander, M. P., Levine, B., & Katz, D. (2001). Stroop performance in focal lesion patients: dissociation of processes and frontal lobe lesion location. Neuropsychologia, 39(8), 771–786. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0028-3932(01)00013-6
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sumiya, H., & Healy, A. F. (2004). Phonology in the bilingual Stroop effect. Memory & Cognition, 32(5), 752–758. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03195865
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tilsen, S. (2009). Subphonemic and cross-phonemic priming in vowel shadowing: Evidence for the involvement of exemplars in production. Journal of Phonetics, 37(3), 276–296. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wocn.2009.03.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tilsen, S. (2013). Inhibitory mechanisms in speech planning maintain and maximize. In A. Yu (Ed.), Origins of sound change: Approaches to phonologization (pp. 112–117). Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Tipper, S. P., Howard, L. A., & Jackson, S. R. (1997). Selective reaching to grasp: Evidence for distractor interference effects. Visual Cognition, 4(1), 1–38. https://doi.org/10.1080/713756749
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tourville, J. A., Reilly, K. J., & Guenther, F. H. (2008). Neural mechanisms underlying auditory feedback control of speech. Neuroimage, 39(3), 1429–1443. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2007.09.054
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van der Stigchel, S., & Theeuwes, J. (2008). Differences in distractor-induced deviation between horizontal and vertical saccade trajectories. Neuroreport, 19(2), 251–254. https://doi.org/10.1097/WNR.0b013e3282f49b3f
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Segbroeck, M., Travadi, R., Vaz, C., Kim, J., Black, M. P., Potamianos, A., & Narayanan, S. S. (2014, September). Classification of cognitive load from speech using an i-vector framework. Interspeech, 2014.
   Google Scholar
• Wedel, A., Kaplan, A., & Jackson, S. (2013). High functional load inhibits phonological contrast loss: A corpus study. Cognition, 128(2), 179–186. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2013.03.002
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wedel, A., Nelson, N., & Sharp, R. (2018). The phonetic specificity of contrastive hyperarticulation in natural speech. Journal of Memory and Language, 100, 61–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2018.01.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wheeldon, L. (2003). Inhibitory form priming of spoken word production. Language and Cognitive Processes, 18(1), 81–109. https://doi.org/10.1080/01690960143000470
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wiener, D., Tabor Connor, L., & Obler, L. (2004). Inhibition and auditory comprehension in Wernicke's aphasia. Aphasiology, 18(5-7), 599–609. https://doi.org/10.1080/02687030444000228
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wittels, P., Johannes, B., Enne, R., Kirsch, K., & Gunga, H. C. (2002). Voice monitoring to measure emotional load during short-term stress. European Journal of Applied Physiology, 87(3), 278–282. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00421-002-0625-1
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wright, R. (2004). Factors of lexical competition in vowel articulation. In J. Local, R. Ogden, & R. Temple (Eds.), Papers in laboratory phonology VI (pp. 26–50). Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Yaniv, I., Meyer, D. E., Gordon, P. C., Huff, C. A., & Sevald, C. A. (1990). Vowel similarity, connectionist models, and syllable structure in motor programming of speech. Journal of Memory and Language, 29(1), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-596X(90)90007-M
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar