Dataset Information

Can perceptual training alter the effect of visual biofeedback in speech-motor learning?

ABSTRACT: Recent work showing that a period of perceptual training can modulate the magnitude of speech-motor learning in a perturbed auditory feedback task could inform clinical interventions or second-language training strategies. The present study investigated the influence of perceptual training on a clinically and pedagogically relevant task of vocally matching a visually presented speech target using visual-acoustic biofeedback. Forty female adults aged 18-35?yr received perceptual training targeting the English /æ-?/ contrast, randomly assigned to a condition that shifted the perceptual boundary toward either /æ/ or /?/. Participants were then asked to produce the word head while modifying their output to match a visually presented acoustic target corresponding with a slightly higher first formant (F1, closer to /æ/). By analogy to findings from previous research, it was predicted that individuals whose boundary was shifted toward /æ/ would also show a greater magnitude of change in the visual biofeedback task. After perceptual training, the groups showed the predicted difference in perceptual boundary location, but they did not differ in their performance on the biofeedback matching task. It is proposed that the explicit versus implicit nature of the tasks used might account for the difference between this study and previous findings.

SUBMITTER: Klaus A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6374144 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Can perceptual training alter the effect of visual biofeedback in speech-motor learning?

Klaus Adam A Lametti Daniel R DR Shiller Douglas M DM McAllister Tara T

The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 20190201 2

Recent work showing that a period of perceptual training can modulate the magnitude of speech-motor learning in a perturbed auditory feedback task could inform clinical interventions or second-language training strategies. The present study investigated the influence of perceptual training on a clinically and pedagogically relevant task of vocally matching a visually presented speech target using visual-acoustic biofeedback. Forty female adults aged 18-35 yr received perceptual training targetin ...[more]

PMID: 30823822

Similar Datasets

Project description:Recent evidence suggests that the incorporation of visual biofeedback technologies may enhance response to treatment in individuals with residual speech errors. However, there is a need for controlled research systematically comparing biofeedback versus non-biofeedback intervention approaches. This study implemented a single-subject experimental design with a crossover component to investigate the relative efficacy of visual-acoustic biofeedback and traditional articulatory treatment for residual rhotic errors. Eleven child/adolescent participants received ten sessions of visual-acoustic biofeedback and 10 sessions of traditional treatment, with the order of biofeedback and traditional phases counterbalanced across participants. Probe measures eliciting untreated rhotic words were administered in at least three sessions prior to the start of treatment (baseline), between the two treatment phases (midpoint), and after treatment ended (maintenance), as well as before and after each treatment session. Perceptual accuracy of rhotic production was assessed by outside listeners in a blinded, randomized fashion. Results were analyzed using a combination of visual inspection of treatment trajectories, individual effect sizes, and logistic mixed-effects regression. Effect sizes and visual inspection revealed that participants could be divided into categories of strong responders (n = 4), mixed/moderate responders (n = 3), and non-responders (n = 4). Individual results did not reveal a reliable pattern of stronger performance in biofeedback versus traditional blocks, or vice versa. Moreover, biofeedback versus traditional treatment was not a significant predictor of accuracy in the logistic mixed-effects model examining all within-treatment word probes. However, the interaction between treatment condition and treatment order was significant: biofeedback was more effective than traditional treatment in the first phase of treatment, and traditional treatment was more effective than biofeedback in the second phase. This is consistent with existing theory and data suggesting that detailed knowledge of performance feedback is most effective in the early stages of motor learning. Further research is needed to confirm that an initial phase of biofeedback has a facilitative effect, and to determine the optimal duration of biofeedback treatment. In addition, there is a strong need for correlational studies to examine which individuals with residual speech errors are most likely to respond to treatment.

Dataset Information

Can perceptual training alter the effect of visual biofeedback in speech-motor learning?

Publications

Can perceptual training alter the effect of visual biofeedback in speech-motor learning?

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets