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


     

Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research Vol.52 755-765 June 2009. doi:10.1044/1092-4388(2009/07-0256)
© 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
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Wright, D. L.
Right arrow Articles by Fox, P. T.
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Wright, D. L.
Right arrow Articles by Fox, P. T.
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?

Using the Self-Select Paradigm to Delineate the Nature of Speech Motor Programming

David L. Wright
Texas A&M University

Don A. Robin
The University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio and University of Texas, San Antonio

Jooyhun Rhee
Amber Vaculin
Texas A&M University

Adam Jacks
The University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio

Frank H. Guenther
Boston University

Peter T. Fox
The University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio and University of Texas, San Antonio

Contact author: David L. Wright, Human Performance Laboratory, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77843-4243. E-mail: d-wright{at}hlkn.tamu.edu.

Purpose: The authors examined the involvement of 2 speech motor programming processes identified by S. T. Klapp (1995, 2003) during the articulation of utterances differing in syllable and sequence complexity. According to S. T. Klapp, 1 process, INT, resolves the demands of the programmed unit, whereas a second process, SEQ, oversees the serial order demands of longer sequences.

Method: A modified reaction time paradigm was used to assess INT and SEQ demands. Specifically, syllable complexity was dependent on syllable structure, whereas sequence complexity involved either repeated or unique syllabi within an utterance.

Results: INT execution was slowed when articulating single syllables in the form CCCV compared to simpler CV syllables. Planning unique syllables within a multisyllabic utterance rather than repetitions of the same syllable slowed INT but not SEQ.

Conclusions: The INT speech motor programming process, important for mental syllabary access, is sensitive to changes in both syllable structure and the number of unique syllables in an utterance.

KEY WORDS: speech, motor response, memory, motor programming


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 © 2009 by the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association.