Audiovisual speech segmentation in post-stroke aphasia: a pilot study

References

• Herrmann M, Koch U, Johannsen-Horbach H, Wallesch C-W. Communicative skills in chronic and severe nonfluent aphasia. Brain Lang. 1989;37(2):339–352. doi:10.1016/0093-934X(89)90022-9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johnson EK, Jusczyk PW. Word segmentation by 8-month-olds: when speech cues count more than statistics. J Memory Lang. 2001;44(4):548–567. doi:10.1006/jmla.2000.2755.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Snijders TM, Kooijman V, Cutler A, Hagoort P. Neurophysiological evidence of delayed segmentation in a foreign language. Brain Res. 2007;1178:106–113. doi:10.1016/j.brainres.2007.07.080.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• El Hachioui H, Visch-Brink EG, LML DL, et al. Screening tests for aphasia in patients with stroke: a systematic review. J Neurol. 2017;264(2):211–220.doi:10.1007/s00415-016-8170-8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mattys SL, White L, Melhorn JF. Integration of multiple speech segmentation cues: a hierarchical framework. J Exp Psychol Gen. 2005;134(4):477–500. doi:10.1037/0096-3445.134.4.477.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peñaloza C, Benetello A, Tuomiranta L, et al. Speech segmentation in aphasia. Aphasiology. 2015;29(6):724–743.doi:10.1080/02687038.2014.982500.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Saffran JR, Newport EL, Aslin RN. Word segmentation: the role of distributional cues. J Memory Lang. 1996;35(4):606–621. doi:10.1006/jmla.1996.0032.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McClelland JL, Elman JL. The TRACE model of speech perception. Cogn Psychol. 1986;18(1):1–86. doi:10.1016/0010-0285(86)90015-0.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Norris D. Shortlist: a connectionist model of continuous speech recognition. Cognition. 1994;52(3):189–234. doi:10.1016/0010-0277(94)90043-4.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jacquemot C, Dupoux E, Decouche O, Bachoud-Lévi A-C. Misperception in sentences but not in words: speech perception and the phonological buffer. Cogn Neuropsychol. 2006;23(6):949–971. doi:10.1080/02643290600625749.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Benoît C, Mohamadi T, Kandel S. Effects of phonetic context on audio-visual intelligibility of french. J Speech Hear Res. 1994;37(5):1195–1203. doi:10.1044/jshr.3705.1195.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Sato M, Basirat A, Schwartz J-L. Visual contribution to the multistable perception of speech. Percept Psychophysics. 2007;69(8):1360–1372. doi:10.3758/BF03192952.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• AD M, Weiss DJ. Visual speech segmentation: using facial cues to locate word boundaries in continuous speech. Lang Cognition Neurosci. 2014;29(7):771–780. doi:10.1080/01690965.2013.791703.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peelle JE, Sommers MS. Prediction and constraint in audiovisual speech perception. Cortex. 2015;68:169–181. doi:10.1016/j.cortex.2015.03.006.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arnold P, Hill F. Bisensory augmentation: A speechreading advantage when speech is clearly audible and intact. Br J Psychol. 2001;92(2):339–355. doi:10.1348/000712601162220.
   Google Scholar
• Fridriksson J, Baker JM, Janet W, et al. Treating visual speech perception to improve speech production in nonfluent aphasia. Stroke. 2009;40(3):853–858.doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.108.532499.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Choe Y, Stanton K. The effect of visual cues provided by computerised aphasia treatment. Aphasiology. 2011;25(9):983–997. doi:10.1080/02687038.2011.569893.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mazaux JM, Orgogozo JM. Echelle d’évaluation de l’aphasie: adaptation française du Boston Diagnostic Aphasia Examination. In: Issy-les-Moulineaux. France: Editions Scientifiques et Psychologiques;1982.
   Google Scholar
• Majerus S, M-A VDK, Renard C, Van der Linden M, Poncelet M. Treating verbal short-term memory deficits by increasing the duration of temporary phonological representations: A case study. Brain Lang. 2005;95(1):174–175. doi:10.1016/j.bandl.2005.07.094.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Majerus S. Language repetition and short-term memory: an integrative framework. Front Hum Neurosci. 2013;7. doi:10.3389/fnhum.2013.00357.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tests et outils mis à disposition - Tâches d’évaluation du langage oral réceptif. https://www.psyncog.uliege.be/cms/c_3777644/fr/tests-et-outils-mis-a-disposition. Accessed October 1, 2017.
   Google Scholar
• Pellegrino F, Coupé C, Marsico E. Across-language perspective on speech information rate. Language. 2011;87(3):539–558. doi:10.1353/lan.2011.0057.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rodero E. A comparative analysis of speech rate and perception in radio bulletins. Text Talk. 2012;32:3. doi:10.1515/text-2012-0019.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Basirat A, Brunellière A, Hartsuiker R. The role of audiovisual speech in the early stages of lexical processing as revealed by the ERP word repetition effect. Lang Learn. 2018;68:80–101. doi:10.1111/lang.12265.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boersma P. Praat, a system for doing phonetics by computer. Glot Int. 2002;5:341–345.
   Google Scholar
• Ludbrook J, Dudley H. Why permutation tests are superior to T and F tests in biomedical research. Am Statistician. 1998;52(2):127–132. doi:10.1080/00031305.1998.10480551.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rietveld T, van Hout R. The t test and beyond: recommendations for testing the central tendencies of two independent samples in research on speech, language and hearing pathology. J Commun Disord. 2015;58:158–168. doi:10.1016/j.jcomdis.2015.08.002.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sommers MS, Tye-Murray N, Spehar B. Auditory-visual speech perception and auditory-visual enhancement in normal-hearing younger and older adults. Ear Hear. 2005;26(3):263. doi:10.1097/00003446-200506000-00003.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Engen KJ, Xie Z, Chandrasekaran B. Audiovisual sentence recognition not predicted by susceptibility to the McGurk effect. Atten Percept Psychophys. 2017;79(2):396–403. doi:10.3758/s13414-016-1238-9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blumstein SE. Auditory word recognition: evidence from aphasia and functional neuroimaging. Lang Ling Compass. 2009;3(4):824–838. doi:10.1111/j.1749-818X.2009.00136.x.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Mirman D, Yee E, Blumstein SE, Magnuson JS. Theories of spoken word recognition deficits in aphasia: evidence from eye-tracking and computational modeling. Brain Lang. 2011;117(2):53–68. doi:10.1016/j.bandl.2011.01.004.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marslen-Wilson WD. Functional parallelism in spoken word-recognition. Cognition. 1987;25(1):71–102. doi:10.1016/0010-0277(87)90005-9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dial H, Martin R. Evaluating the relationship between sublexical and lexical processing in speech perception: evidence from aphasia. Neuropsychologia. 2017;96:192–212. doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2017.01.009.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hickok G, Poeppel D. The cortical organization of speech processing. Nat Rev Neurosci. 2007;8(5):393–402. doi:10.1038/nrn2113.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Caplan D, Waters GS. Verbal working memory and sentence comprehension. Behav Brain Sci. 1999;22:01. doi:10.1017/S0140525X99001788.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Makuuchi M, Friederici AD. Hierarchical functional connectivity between the core language system and the working memory system. Cortex. 2013;49(9):2416–2423. doi:10.1016/j.cortex.2013.01.007.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Traxler MJ. Trends in syntactic parsing: anticipation, Bayesian estimation, and good-enough parsing. Trends Cogn Sci. 2014;18(11):605–611. doi:10.1016/j.tics.2014.08.001.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Frazier L, Fodor JD. The sausage machine: A new two-stage parsing model. Cognition. 1978;6(4):291–325. doi:10.1016/0010-0277(78)90002-1.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• MacDonald MC, Christiansen MH. Reassessing working memory: comment on Just and Carpenter (1992) and Waters and Caplan (1996). Psychol Rev. 2002;109(1):35–54. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.109.1.35.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sanders LD, Neville HJ. An ERP study of continuous speech processing: I. Segmentation, semantics, and syntax in native speakers. Cognit Brain Res. 2003;15(3):228–240. doi:10.1016/S0926-6410(02)00195-7.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Yee E, Blumstein SE, Sedivy JC. Lexical-semantic activation in Broca’s and Wernicke’s aphasia: evidence from eye movements. J Cogn Neurosci. 2008;20(4):592–612. doi:10.1162/jocn.2008.20056.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• MUC HP. (Memory, unification, control) and beyond. Front Psychol. 2013;4. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00416.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hickok G, Rogalsky C, Matchin W. et al. Neural networks supporting audiovisual integration for speech: A large-scale lesion study. Cortex. 2018;103:360–371. doi:10.1016/j.cortex.2018.03.030.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baum SH, Martin RC, Hamilton AC, Beauchamp MS. Multisensory speech perception without the left superior temporal sulcus. Neuroimage. 2012;62(3):1825–1832. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2012.05.034.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arnal LH, Giraud A-L. Cortical oscillations and sensory predictions. Trends Cogn Sci. 2012;16(7):390–398. doi:10.1016/j.tics.2012.05.003.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Biau E, Soto-Faraco S. Synchronization by the hand: the sight of gestures modulates low-frequency activity in brain responses to continuous speech. Front Hum Neurosci. 2015;9. doi:10.3389/fnhum.2015.00527.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Teki S, Barnes GR, Penny WD, et al. The right hemisphere supports but does not replace left hemisphere auditory function in patients with persisting aphasia. Brain. 2013;136(6):1901–1912.doi:10.1093/brain/awt087.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Cope TE, Sohoglu E, Sedley W, et al. Evidence for causal top-down frontal contributions to predictive processes in speech perception. Nat Commun. 2017;8(1):2154.doi:10.1038/s41467-017-01958-7.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Magnotti JF, Beauchamp MS. Published estimates of group differences in multisensory integration are inflated. Plos One. 2018;13(9):e0202908. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0202908.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar