Albert Postma’s research while affiliated with Utrecht University and other places

What is this page?


This page lists works of an author who doesn't have a ResearchGate profile or hasn't added the works to their profile yet. It is automatically generated from public (personal) data to further our legitimate goal of comprehensive and accurate scientific recordkeeping. If you are this author and want this page removed, please let us know.

Publications (1)


Production and Detection of Speech Errors in Silent, Mouthed, Noise-Masked, and Normal Auditory Feedback Speech
  • Article

October 1996

·

37 Reads

·

102 Citations

Language and Speech

Albert Postma

·

Catharina Noordanus

In this study subjects had to report their errors during the speeded production of tongue twister sentences in one of four speech conditions: silent, mouthed, noise-masked, and normal auditory feedback speech. In contrast to the other three conditions, silent speech comprises speech planning but no articulation. Error monitoring in the normal auditory feedback condition may occur both by means of an inner speech (prearticulatory) loop and by means of auditory feedback, whereas in the other conditions only the first channel is available. The results showed that reported error rates were roughly equal in the silent, mouthed, and noise-masked condition, with an increase in the normal auditory feedback condition. Significantly more phonemic-sized errors and disfluencies were reported with auditory feedback, whereas word errors were less frequent. Notwithstanding the differences with respect to error size, report rates for the individual error categories (e.g. anticipations, perseverations, substitutions, etc.) did not differ notably for the four conditions. Errors typically occurred at the same points across speech conditions. These results suggest that speech planning processes are similar in the four speech conditions. Moreover, actual motor execution (i.e. articulation) does not appear to be an important contributor to the error events under study. The main difference between conditions can be attributed to the available monitoring channels.

Citations (1)


... Extensive research has provided evidence that both cognitive and motor aspects of speech are monitored continuously for fluent production. For instance, naturally to their own speech errors, including accurate self-reporting of errors in various environments (Postma and Noordanus, 1996;Gauvin et al., 2016); post-error increases in response latencies (Ganushchak and Schiller, 2006); and self-repairs (Levelt, 1983). It has been observed that certain speech error repairs occur too rapidly to be attributed to the interception and planning of corrections after the error is produced, suggesting that errors are intercepted before becoming overt (Levelt, 1983;Hartsuiker and Kolk, 2001). ...

Reference:

A robust temporal map of speech monitoring from planning to articulation
Production and Detection of Speech Errors in Silent, Mouthed, Noise-Masked, and Normal Auditory Feedback Speech
  • Citing Article
  • October 1996

Language and Speech