This site needs JavaScript to work properly. Please enable it to take advantage of the complete set of features!

Skip to main page content

Add to Collections

Your saved search

Name of saved search:

Search terms:

Test search terms

Would you like email updates of new search results?

Yes
No

Email: (change)

Frequency:

Which day?

Which day?

Report format:

Send at most:

Send even when there aren't any new results

Optional text in email:

Your RSS Feed

. 2014 Jul 21:8:514.

doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2014.00514. eCollection 2014.

Mind what you say-general and specific mechanisms for monitoring in speech production

Greig I de Zubicaray¹, Robert J Hartsuiker², Daniel J Acheson³

Affiliations

Affiliations

¹ School of Psychology, University of Queensland Brisbane, QLD, Australia.
² Department of Experimental Psychology, Ghent University Ghent, Belgium.
³ Neurobiology of Language Department, Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics Nijmegen, Netherlands.

PMID: 25100968
PMCID: PMC4104548
DOI: 10.3389/fnhum.2014.00514

Mind what you say-general and specific mechanisms for monitoring in speech production

Greig I de Zubicaray et al. Front Hum Neurosci. 2014.

. 2014 Jul 21:8:514.

doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2014.00514. eCollection 2014.

Authors

Greig I de Zubicaray¹, Robert J Hartsuiker², Daniel J Acheson³

Affiliations

¹ School of Psychology, University of Queensland Brisbane, QLD, Australia.
² Department of Experimental Psychology, Ghent University Ghent, Belgium.
³ Neurobiology of Language Department, Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics Nijmegen, Netherlands.

PMID: 25100968
PMCID: PMC4104548
DOI: 10.3389/fnhum.2014.00514

No abstract available

Keywords: attention; control; lexical access; monitoring; speech production and perception.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Assessing speech perception in Swedish school-aged children: preliminary data on the Listen-Say test.
Nakeva von Mentzer C, Sundström M, Enqvist K, Hällgren M. Nakeva von Mentzer C, et al. Logoped Phoniatr Vocol. 2018 Oct;43(3):106-119. doi: 10.1080/14015439.2017.1380076. Epub 2017 Oct 10. Logoped Phoniatr Vocol. 2018. PMID: 28994616
Now you see it ... and now again: semantic interference reflects lexical competition in speech production with and without articulation.
Abdel Rahman R, Aristei S. Abdel Rahman R, et al. Psychon Bull Rev. 2010 Oct;17(5):657-61. doi: 10.3758/PBR.17.5.657. Psychon Bull Rev. 2010. PMID: 21037163
Watch what you say and how you say it: differential response to speech by participants with and without head injuries.
Johnson DM, Dixon DR, Coon RC, Hilker K, Gouvier WD. Johnson DM, et al. Appl Neuropsychol. 2002;9(1):58-62. doi: 10.1207/S15324826AN0901_7. Appl Neuropsychol. 2002. PMID: 12173751
A theory of lexical access in speech production.
Levelt WJ, Roelofs A, Meyer AS. Levelt WJ, et al. Behav Brain Sci. 1999 Feb;22(1):1-38; discussion 38-75. doi: 10.1017/s0140525x99001776. Behav Brain Sci. 1999. PMID: 11301520 Review.
Psychoacoustic studies on the processing of vocal interjections: how to disentangle lexical and prosodic information?
Dietrich S, Ackermann H, Szameitat DP, Alter K. Dietrich S, et al. Prog Brain Res. 2006;156:295-302. doi: 10.1016/S0079-6123(06)56016-9. Prog Brain Res. 2006. PMID: 17015087 Review.

See all similar articles

Cited by

Monitoring of language selection errors in switching: Not all about conflict.
Zheng X, Roelofs A, Farquhar J, Lemhöfer K. Zheng X, et al. PLoS One. 2018 Nov 26;13(11):e0200397. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0200397. eCollection 2018. PLoS One. 2018. PMID: 30475803 Free PMC article.

References

1. Acheson D. J., Hagoort P. (2014). Twisting tongues to test for conflict-monitoring in speech production. Front. Hum. Neurosci. 8:206 10.3389/fnhum.2014.00206 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
1. Crowther J. E., Martin R. C. (2014). Lexical selection in the semantically blocked cyclic naming task: the role of cognitive control and learning. Front. Hum. Neurosci. 8:9 10.3389/fnhum.2014.00009 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
1. de Zubicaray G., McMahon K., Eastburn M., Pringle A. (2006). Top-down influences on lexical selection during spoken word production: a 4T fMRI investigation of refractory effects in picture naming. Hum. Brain Mapp. 27, 864–873 10.1002/hbm.20227 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
1. Gauvin H. S., Haretsuiker R. J., Huettig F. (2013). Speech monitoring and phonologically-mediated eye gaze in language perception and production: a comparison using printed word eye-tracking. Front. Hum. Neurosci. 7:818 10.3389/fnhum.2013.00818 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
1. Lind A., Hall L., Breidegard B., Balkenius C., Johansson P. (2014). Auditory feedback of one's own voice is used for high-level semantic monitoring: the “self-comprehension” hypothesis. Front. Hum. Neurosci. 8:166 10.3389/fnhum.2014.00166 - DOI - PMC - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources

Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
- scite Smart Citations