Department of Speech and Hearing Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle.
Department of Speech, Language, and Hearing Sciences, Boston University, MA.
J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2024 Jan 8;67(1):34-48. doi: 10.1044/2023_JSLHR-23-00038. Epub 2023 Nov 22.
Behavioral assays of feedforward and feedback auditory-motor control of voice and articulation frequently are used to make inferences about underlying neural mechanisms and to study speech development and disorders. However, no studies have examined the test-retest reliability of such measures, which is critical for rigorous study of auditory-motor control. Thus, the purpose of the present study was to assess the reliability of assays of feedforward and feedback control in voice versus articulation domains.
Twenty-eight participants (14 cisgender women, 12 cisgender men, one transgender man, one transmasculine/nonbinary) who denied any history of speech, hearing, or neurological impairment were measured for responses to predictable versus unexpected auditory feedback perturbations of vocal (fundamental frequency, ) and articulatory (first formant, ) acoustic parameters twice, with 3-6 weeks between sessions. Reliability was measured with intraclass correlations.
Opposite patterns of reliability were observed for and ; reflexive responses showed good reliability and adaptive responses showed poor reliability, whereas reflexive responses showed poor reliability and adaptive responses showed moderate reliability. However, a criterion-referenced categorical measurement of adaptive responses as typical versus atypical showed substantial test-retest agreement.
Individual responses to some behavioral assays of auditory-motor control of speech should be interpreted with caution, which has implications for several fields of research. Additional research is needed to establish reliable criterion-referenced measures of adaptive responses as well as and reflexive responses. Furthermore, the opposite patterns of test-retest reliability observed for voice versus articulation add to growing evidence for differences in underlying neural control mechanisms.
用于推断语音和发音的前馈和反馈听觉-运动控制的基础神经机制，并研究言语发展和障碍的前馈和反馈听觉-运动控制行为测定，经常被使用。然而，目前还没有研究检查这些措施的测试-重测信度，这对于听觉-运动控制的严格研究至关重要。因此，本研究的目的是评估语音和发音领域的前馈和反馈控制测定的可靠性。
28 名参与者（14 名顺性别女性，12 名顺性别男性，1 名跨性别男性，1 名跨性别男性/非二元性别）否认有言语、听力或神经损伤史，他们被测量了对可预测与不可预测的听觉反馈扰动的反应，涉及到声音（基频，）和发音（第一共振峰，）声学参数，两次测量之间间隔 3-6 周。可靠性用组内相关系数来衡量。
和的可靠性模式相反；反射性反应表现出良好的可靠性，而适应性反应表现出较差的可靠性，而反射性反应表现出较差的可靠性，而适应性反应表现出中等的可靠性。然而，适应性反应的基于标准的分类测量作为典型与非典型表现出相当大的测试-重测一致性。
对某些语音听觉-运动控制行为测定的个体反应应谨慎解释，这对几个研究领域都有影响。需要进一步研究，以建立可靠的基于标准的适应性反应以及反射性反应的测量方法。此外，语音与发音的测试-重测可靠性模式相反，这增加了潜在神经控制机制差异的证据。
