Speech monitoring and phonologically-mediated eye gaze in language perception and production: a comparison using printed word eye-tracking
- PMID: 24339809
- PMCID: PMC3857580
- DOI: 10.3389/fnhum.2013.00818
Speech monitoring and phonologically-mediated eye gaze in language perception and production: a comparison using printed word eye-tracking
Abstract
The Perceptual Loop Theory of speech monitoring assumes that speakers routinely inspect their inner speech. In contrast, Huettig and Hartsuiker (2010) observed that listening to one's own speech during language production drives eye-movements to phonologically related printed words with a similar time-course as listening to someone else's speech does in speech perception experiments. This suggests that speakers use their speech perception system to listen to their own overt speech, but not to their inner speech. However, a direct comparison between production and perception with the same stimuli and participants is lacking so far. The current printed word eye-tracking experiment therefore used a within-subjects design, combining production and perception. Displays showed four words, of which one, the target, either had to be named or was presented auditorily. Accompanying words were phonologically related, semantically related, or unrelated to the target. There were small increases in looks to phonological competitors with a similar time-course in both production and perception. Phonological effects in perception however lasted longer and had a much larger magnitude. We conjecture that this difference is related to a difference in predictability of one's own and someone else's speech, which in turn has consequences for lexical competition in other-perception and possibly suppression of activation in self-perception.
Keywords: language production; perceptual loop theory; speech perception; speech prediction; verbal self-monitoring.
Figures



Similar articles
-
Modeling Interactions between Speech Production and Perception: Speech Error Detection at Semantic and Phonological Levels and the Inner Speech Loop.Front Comput Neurosci. 2016 May 31;10:51. doi: 10.3389/fncom.2016.00051. eCollection 2016. Front Comput Neurosci. 2016. PMID: 27303287 Free PMC article.
-
Can hearing puter activate pupil? Phonological competition and the processing of reduced spoken words in spontaneous conversations.Q J Exp Psychol (Hove). 2012;65(11):2193-220. doi: 10.1080/17470218.2012.693109. Epub 2012 Aug 30. Q J Exp Psychol (Hove). 2012. PMID: 22934784
-
The nature of the visual environment induces implicit biases during language-mediated visual search.Mem Cognit. 2011 Aug;39(6):1068-84. doi: 10.3758/s13421-011-0086-z. Mem Cognit. 2011. PMID: 21461784
-
Stages of lexical access in language production.Cognition. 1992 Mar;42(1-3):287-314. doi: 10.1016/0010-0277(92)90046-k. Cognition. 1992. PMID: 1582160 Review.
-
Observing the what and when of language production for different age groups by monitoring speakers' eye movements.Brain Lang. 2006 Dec;99(3):272-88. doi: 10.1016/j.bandl.2005.08.003. Epub 2005 Nov 10. Brain Lang. 2006. PMID: 16290041 Free PMC article. Review.
Cited by
-
Mind what you say-general and specific mechanisms for monitoring in speech production.Front Hum Neurosci. 2014 Jul 21;8:514. doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2014.00514. eCollection 2014. Front Hum Neurosci. 2014. PMID: 25100968 Free PMC article. No abstract available.
-
Towards a New Model of Verbal Monitoring.J Cogn. 2020 Sep 3;3(1):17. doi: 10.5334/joc.81. J Cogn. 2020. PMID: 32944680 Free PMC article.
-
Describing Art - An Interdisciplinary Approach to the Effects of Speaking on Gaze Movements during the Beholding of Paintings.PLoS One. 2014 Dec 10;9(12):e102439. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0102439. eCollection 2014. PLoS One. 2014. PMID: 25494170 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Allopenna P. D., Magnuson J. S., Tanenhaus M. K. (1998). Tracking the time course of spoken word recognition using eye movements: evidence for continuous mapping models. J. Mem. Lang. 38, 419–439 10.1006/jmla.1997.2558 - DOI
-
- Baars B. J., Motley M. T., MacKay D. G. (1975). Output editing for lexical status in artificially elicited slips of the tongue. J. Verb. Learn. Verb. Behav. 14, 382–391 10.1016/S0022-5371(75)80017-X - DOI
-
- Boersma P., Weenink D. (2012). Praat: doing phonetics by computer [computer program]. Version 5.3.11, (Retrieved 27 March 2012). Avilable online at http://www.praat.org/
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources