shadowed speech and delayed auditory feedback

delayed auditory feedback – DAF

 

shadowed speech and delayed auditory feedback
shadowed speech and delayed auditory feedback

There is a range of evidence that points to the notion that stuttering is associ-ated with disrupted auditory processing, although the exact nature of this disruption remains obscure. Shadowed speech can produce high levels of fluency, but this may have little to do with any timing misperception induced by a faulty processing system; we know that unison speech similarly produces high levels of fluency with no delay. We also know that DAF and FAF can have dramatic fluency enhancing effects for some people who stutter, yet others remain DAF and FAF negative, for reasons which are currently unknown. Also,   there are reports from some people who stutter that the effects of altered feedback can wear off over time
Perhaps these findings suggest that distraction may play as big a part in inducing fluency as correcting any misperception of a disrupted auditory timing processing system 

brain studies have shown differences in functioning between people who stutter and control group

3 Stuttering and auditory processing 57speakers across linguistic and motor areas. The dichotic listening procedure provides one testable method of determining hemispheric dominance for lin-guistic decoding, and findings from such studies, though far from definitive, lend tentative support to the idea that auditory processing too might be a product of the right hemisphere, at least in some people who stutter. One of the biggest issues faced is that auditory processing is just one part of the communication chain and does not occur in a vacuum. Both production and perception theories must allow for the fact that one is affected by the other
This can lead to a chicken and egg situation, as brought into sharp focus in the criticism of Harrington’s theory of linguistic rhythm and auditory feedback: it can be almost impossible to determine what is cause and what is effect

Key points
” The deaf population is the only one in which stuttering is underrepresented. ” Stuttered speech may be improved under a number of conditions which serve to disrupt or alter auditory feedback, such as masking, delayed auditory feedback (DAF), frequency altered feedback (FAF), choral and unison speech. ” People who stutter may be more reliant on auditory feedback than those who do not stutter. ” The  fluency enhancing effects of altered feedback devices may work by convincing the brain that the speaker’ s speech is actually the product of an external speech source.  There is evidence that, like processing for speech production, auditory processing for speech may be a product of right hemisphere processing amongst older children and adults who stutter.  It has been argued that stuttering might result due to misperception of the timing of stressed vowels in speech (Harrington, 1988). ” It is possible that auditory processing anomalies may in fact merely represent  knockonÓ effects of a decit that are in essence production based

 

Further reading

Harrington, J. (1988). Stuttering, delayed auditory feedback and linguistic rhythm
Journal of Speech and Hearing Research
Aside from the theoretical implications, this thought-provoking paper provides a well-explained introduction into the links between perception and production aspects of speech processing in stuttering
 Stuttering and clutteringKalinowski, J., Armson, J., Roland

Mieszowski, M., & Stuart, A. (1993). Effects of alterations in auditory feedback and speech rate on stuttering frequency. Language and Speech,
As with the selected reading list from chapter 14 which discusses auditory feedback from a therapeutic perspective, there is a wide range of Kalinowski and colleagues’ work that could have been included here. This one is an early but influential article on the discovery that altered feedback could reduce stuttering, without invoking a slowed speech rate
Rosenfield, D.B., & Jerger, J. (1984). Stuttering and auditory function. In R. Curlee and W. H. Perkins (Eds.), The nature and treatment of stuttering: New directions . San Diego, CA: College Hill Press
Much of the work on stuttering and auditory function was undertaken in the 1970s and early 1980s. Despite its age, this is still a very good source for earlier material on the subject of auditory processing and covers a lot of ground. There is currently no similar but more recent publication on the subject

Leave a Reply