Processing of self-repairs in stuttered and non-stuttered speech

References

• Arnold, J. E., Fagnano, M., & Tanenhaus, M. K. (2003). Disfluencies signal theee, um, new information. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 32, 25–36. doi: 10.1023/A:1021980931292
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arnold, J. E., Hudson Kam, C. L., & Tanenhaus, M. K. (2007). If you say thee uh you are describing something hard: The on-line attribution of disfluency during reference comprehension. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 33, 914–930. doi: 10.1037/0278-7393.33.5.914
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arnold, J. E., Tanenhaus, M. K., Altmann, R., & Fagnano, M. (2004). The old and thee, uh, new. Psychological Science, 15, 578–582. doi: 10.1111/j.0956-7976.2004.00723.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baayen, R. H., Davidson, D. H., & Bates, D. M. (2008). Mixed-effects modeling with crossed random effects for subjects and items. Journal of Memory and Language, 59, 390–412. doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2007.12.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bailey, K. G. D., & Ferreira, F. (2003). Disfluencies affect the parsing of garden-path sentences. Journal of Memory & Language, 49, 183–200. doi: 10.1016/S0749-596X(03)00027-5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bailey, K. G. D., & Ferreira, F. (2007). The processing of filled pause disfluencies in the visual world. In R. P. G. van Gompel, M. H. Fischer, W. S. Murray, & R. L. Hill (Eds.), Eye movements: A window on mind and brain (pp. 485–500). Oxford: Elsevier.
   Google Scholar
• Barr, D. J. (2008). Analyzing ‘visual world’ eyetracking data using multilevel logistic regression. Journal of Memory and Language, 59, 457–474. doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2007.09.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barr, D. J., Levy, R., Scheepers, C., & Tily, H. J. (2013). Random effects structure for confirmatory hypothesis testing: Keep it maximal. Journal of Memory and Language, 68, 255–278. doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2012.11.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barr, D. J., & Seyfeddinipur, M. (2010). The role of fillers in listener attributions for speaker disfluency. Language and Cognitive Processes, 25, 441–455. doi: 10.1080/01690960903047122
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bates, D., Maechler, M., & Dai, B. (2012). lme4: Linear mixed-effects models using S4 classes. Retrieved from http://lme4.r-forge.r-project/org
   Google Scholar
• Bloodstein, O., & Bernstein Ratner, N. (2008). A handbook on stuttering. New York: Thomson Delmar Learning.
   Google Scholar
• Bortfeld, H., Leon, S., Bloom, J., Schober, M., & Brennan, S. (2001). Disfluency rates in conversation: Effects of age, relationship, topic, role, and gender. Language and Speech, 44, 123–147. doi: 10.1177/00238309010440020101
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bosker, H. R., Quené, H., Sanders, T., & de Jong, N. H. (2014). Native ‘um’s elicit prediction of low-frequency referents, but non-native ‘um’s do not. Journal of Memory and Language, 75, 104–116. doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2014.05.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bowers, A. L., Crawcour, S. C., Saltuklaroglu, T., & Kalinowski, J. (2010). Gaze aversion to stuttered speech: A pilot study investigating differential visual attention to stuttered and fluent speech. International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders, 45, 133–144. doi: 10.3109/13682820902763951
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brennan, S. E., & Schober, M. F. (2001). How listeners compensate for disfluencies in spontaneous speech. Journal of Memory and Language, 44, 274–296. doi: 10.1006/jmla.2000.2753
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clark, A. (2013). Whatever next? Predictive brains, situated agents, and the future of cognitive science. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 36, 181–204. doi: 10.1017/S0140525X12000477
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Corley, M. (2010). Making predictions from speech with repairs: Evidence from eye movements. Language and Cognitive Processes, 25, 706–727. doi: 10.1080/01690960903512489
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Corley, M., & Hartsuiker, R. J. (2011). Why um helps auditory word recognition: The temporal delay hypothesis. PLoS One, 6, e19792. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0019792
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Corley, M., MacGregor, L. J., & Donaldson, D. I. (2007). It’s the way that you, er, say it: Hesitations in speech affect language comprehension. Cognition, 105, 658–668. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2006.10.010
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cyprus, S., Hezel, R. T., Rossi, D., & Adams, M. R. (1984). Effects of simulated stuttering on listener recall. Journal of Fluency Disorders, 9, 191–197. doi: 10.1016/0094-730X(84)90012-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ferreira, F., & Bailey, K. G. D. (2004). Disfluencies and human language comprehension. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 8, 231–237. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2004.03.011
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ferreira, F., Lau, E. F., & Bailey, K. G. D. (2004). Disfluencies, language comprehension, and tree adjoining grammars. Cognitive Science, 28, 721–749. doi: 10.1207/s15516709cog2805_5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ferreira, F., & Lowder, M. W. (2016). Prediction, information structure, and good-enough language processing. Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 65, 217–247. doi: 10.1016/bs.plm.2016.04.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fox Tree, J. E. (1995). The effects of false starts and repetitions on the processing of subsequent words in spontaneous speech. Journal of Memory and Language, 34, 709–738. doi: 10.1006/jmla.1995.1032
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fraundorf, S. H., & Watson, D. G. (2011). The disfluent discourse: Effects of filled pauses on recall. Journal of Memory and Language, 65, 161–175. doi:10.1016/j.jml.2010.06.004 doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2011.03.004
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gibson, E., Bergen, L., & Piantadosi, S. T. (2013). Rational integration of noisy evidence and prior semantic expectations in sentence interpretation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 110, 8051–8056. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1216438110
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gibson, E., Piantadosi, S. T., Brink, K., Bergen, L., Lim, E., & Saxe, R. (2013). A noisy-channel account of crosslinguistic word-order variation. Psychological Science, 24, 1079–1088. doi: 10.1177/0956797612463705
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grodner, D. J., & Sedivy, J. (2011). The effect of speaker-specific information on pragmatic inferences. In E. Gibson & N. Pearlmutter (Eds.), The processing and acquisition of reference (pp. 239–272). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Guntupalli, V. K., Everhart, D. E., Kalinowski, J., Nanjundeswaran, C., & Saltuklaroglu, T. (2007). Emotional and physiological responses of fluent listeners while watching the speech of adults who stutter. International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders, 42, 113–129. doi: 10.1080/10610270600850036
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guntupalli, V. K., Kalinowski, J., Nanjundeswaran, C., Saltuklaroglu, T., & Everhart, D. E. (2006). Psychophysiological responses of adults who do not stutter while listening to stuttering. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 62, 1–8. doi: 10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2005.11.001
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guntupalli, V. K., Nanjundeswaran, C., Dayalu, V. N., & Kalinowski, J. (2012). Autonomic and emotional responses of graduate student clinicians in speech–language pathology to stuttered speech. International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders, 47, 603–608. doi: 10.1111/j.1460-6984.2012.00162.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hanulíková, A., van Alphen, P. M., van Goch, M. M., & Weber, A. (2012). When one person’s mistake is another’s standard usage: The effect of foreign accent on syntactic processing. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 24, 878–887. doi: 10.1162/jocn_a_00103
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Healey, E. C. (2010). What the literature tells us about listeners’ reactions to stuttering: Implications for the clinical management of stuttering. Seminars in Speech and Language, 31(4), 227–235. doi: 10.1055/s-0030-1265756
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Huettig, F., & Mani, N. (2016). Is prediction necessary to understand language? Probably not. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 31, 19–31. doi: 10.1080/23273798.2015.1072223
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hulit, L. M. (1976). Effects of nonfluencies on comprehension. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 42, 1119–1122. doi: 10.2466/pms.1976.42.3c.1119
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jaeger, T. F. (2008). Categorical data analysis: Away from ANOVAs (transformation or not) and towards logit mixed models. Journal of Memory and Language, 59, 434–446. doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2007.11.007
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kidd, C., White, K. S., & Aslin, R. N. (2011). Toddlers use speech disfluencies to predict speakers’ referential intentions. Developmental Science, 14, 925–934. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-7687.2011.01049.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kuperberg, G. R., & Jaeger, T. F. (2016). What do we mean by prediction in language comprehension? Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 31, 32–59. doi: 10.1080/23273798.2015.1102299
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lau, E. F., & Ferreira, F. (2005). Lingering effects of disfluent material on comprehension of garden path sentences. Language and Cognitive Processes, 20, 633–666. doi: 10.1080/01690960444000142
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee, K., & Manning, W. H. (2010). Listener responses according to stuttering self- acknowledgment and modification. Journal of Fluency Disorders, 35, 110–122. doi: 10.1016/j.jfludis.2010.04.001
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lowder, M. W., & Ferreira, F. (2016a). Prediction in the processing of repair disfluencies. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 31, 73–79. doi: 10.1080/23273798.2015.1036089
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lowder, M. W., & Ferreira, F. (2016b). Prediction in the processing of repair disfluencies: Evidence from the visual-world paradigm. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 42, 1400–1416. doi: 10.1037/xlm0000256
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lowder, M. W., & Ferreira, F. (2018). I see what you meant to say: Anticipating speech errors during online language processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General. doi:10.1037/xge0000544. Advance online publication.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Luke, S. G., & Christianson, K. (2016). Limits on lexical prediction during reading. Cognitive Psychology, 88, 22–60. doi: 10.1016/j.cogpsych.2016.06.002
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Matin, E., Shao, K. C., & Boff, K. R. (1993). Saccadic overhead: Information processing time with and without saccades. Perception & Psychophysics, 53, 372–380. doi: 10.3758/BF03206780
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maxfield, N. D., & Ferreira, F. (2019). Backward-looking sentence processing in typically disfluent versus stuttered speech: ERP evidence. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 34, 561–579. doi: 10.1080/23273798.2018.1533140
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maxfield, N. D., Lyon, J. M., & Silliman, E. R. (2009). Disfluencies along the garden path: Brain electrophysiological evidence of disrupted sentence processing. Brain & Language, 111, 86–100. doi: 10.1016/j.bandl.2009.08.003
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Panico, J., & Healey, E. C. (2009). Influence of text type, topic familiarity, and stuttering frequency on listener recall, comprehension, and mental effort. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 52, 534–546. doi: 10.1044/1092-4388(2008/07-0238)
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Panico, J., Healey, E. C., Brouwer, K., & Susca, M. (2005). Listener perceptions of stuttering across two presentation modes: A quantitative and qualitative approach. Journal of Fluency Disorders, 30, 65–85. doi: 10.1016/j.jfludis.2005.01.003
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rooth, M. (1992). A theory of focus interpretation. Natural Language Semantics, 1, 75–116. doi: 10.1007/BF02342617
   Google Scholar
• Sander, E. K. (1965). Comments on investigating listener reaction to speech disfluency. Journal of Speech & Hearing Disorders, 30, 159–165. doi: 10.1044/jshd.3002.159
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Susca, M., & Healey, E. C. (2001). Perceptions of simulated stuttering and fluency. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 44, 61–72. doi: 10.1044/1092-4388(2001/006)
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Susca, M., & Healey, E. C. (2002). Listener perceptions along a fluency-disfluency continuum: A phenomenological analysis. Journal of Fluency Disorders, 27, 135–161. doi: 10.1016/S0094-730X(02)00126-2
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tsiamtsiouris, J., & Cairns, H. S. (2013). Effects of sentence-structure complexity on speech initiation time and disfluency. Journal of Fluency Disorders, 38, 30–44. doi: 10.1016/j.jfludis.2012.12.002
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Berkum, J. J. A., van den Brink, D., Tesink, C. M. J. Y., Kos, M., & Hagoort, P. (2008). The neural integration of speaker and message. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 20, 580–591. doi: 10.1162/jocn.2008.20054
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wingate, M. E. (1964). A standard definition of stuttering. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 29, 484–489. doi: 10.1044/jshd.2904.484
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Yairi, E., & Seery, C. H. (2015). Stuttering: Foundations and clinical applications (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
   Google Scholar
• Zhang, J., Kalinowski, J., Saltuklaroglu, T., & Hudock, D. (2010). Stuttered and fluent speakers’ heart rate and skin conductance in response to fluent and stuttered speech. International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders, 45, 670–680. doi: 10.3109/13682820903391385
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar