JSLHR
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research Vol.50 913-927 August 2007. doi:10.1044/1092-4388(2007/065)
© American Speech-Language-Hearing Association
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow My Folders
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Lane, H.
Right arrow Articles by Zandipour, M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Lane, H.
Right arrow Articles by Zandipour, M.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Facebook   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Effects of Short- and Long-Term Changes in Auditory Feedback on Vowel and Sibilant Contrasts

Harlan Lane
Northeastern University, Boston, and Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge

Melanie L. Matthies
Frank H. Guenther
Boston University and Massachusetts Institute of Technology

Margaret Denny
Massachusetts Institute of Technology

Joseph S. Perkell
Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Boston University

Ellen Stockmann
Massachusetts Institute of Technology

Mark Tiede
Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Haskins Laboratories, New Haven, CT

Jennell Vick
University of Washington, Seattle, and Massachusetts Institute of Technology

Majid Zandipour
Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Boston University

Contact author: Harlan Lane, 15 Rutland Square, Boston, MA 02118. E-mail: lane{at}neu.edu.

Purpose: To assess the effects of short- and long-term changes in auditory feedback on vowel and sibilant contrasts and to evaluate hypotheses arising from a model of speech motor planning.

Method: The perception and production of vowel and sibilant contrasts were measured in 8 postlingually deafened adults prior to activation of their cochlear implant speech processors, 1 month postactivation, and 1 year postactivation. Measures were taken postactivation both with and without auditory feedback. Contrast measures were also made for a group of speakers with reportedly normal hearing speaking with masked and unmasked auditory feedback.

Results: Vowel and sibilant contrasts, measured in the absence of auditory feedback after 1 month of prosthesis use, were diminished compared with their values measured before prosthesis. Contrasts measured in the absence of auditory feedback after 1 year's experience with the prosthesis were increased compared with their values after 1 month's experience. In both time samples, contrasts were enhanced when auditory feedback was restored.

Conclusion: The provision of prosthetic hearing to postlingually deafened adults impaired their phonemic contrasts at first, as their auditory feedback had novel characteristics. Once auditory feedback became recalibrated with prosthesis use, it could, in turn, revise feedforward commands that control the contrasts in its absence.

KEY WORDS: auditory feedback, phoneme contrasts, cochlear implants


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Facebook Facebook   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
All ASHA Journals AJA AJSLP JSLHR LSHSS
Copyright © 2007 by the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association.