CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 291Phonetics and Phonology ResearchNeurobiology of Language and BilingualismReading and Literacy Development

Monitoring the Time Course of Phonological Encoding

Open access
Wheeldon, L.R., Levelt, W.J.M.·1995·Journal of Memory and Language
DOI 10.1006/jmla.1995.1014
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1006/jmla.1995.1014

Cites

80 of 80 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Inner speech largely serves to support error monitoring in speech production, whereby utterances can be inspected and corrected via an 'internal loop'.

    “Such findings support a common view in psycholinguistic research that inner speech largely serves to support error monitoring in speech production, whereby utterances can be inspected and corrected via an “internal loop” (e.g., Wheeldon & Levelt, 1995).”

    From Inner Speech: Development, Cognitive Functions, Phenomenology, and Neurobiology (2015) · cites this paper as Wheeldon & Levelt, 1995

    The “Monitoring Internal Speech” section says speakers can detect and correct errors before articulation and describes an internal loop as one account of how they monitor speech. But it also says the data cannot distinguish that account from a production-system monitor; the “General Discussion” likewise treats the loop as a possibility. The paper does not establish that error monitoring is what inner speech largely serves to do. (LLM, conf=0.87)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Overt articulation of irrelevant speech (articulatory suppression) does not inhibit inner speech completely.

    “There is also evidence that overt articulation of irrelevant speech (articulatory suppression) does not inhibit inner speech completely (Wheeldon & Levelt, 1995), suggesting that inner speech may not be driven entirely by articulation.”

    From Bridging phenomenology and neural mechanisms of inner speech: ALE meta-analysis on egocentricity and spontaneity in a dual-mechanistic framework (2023) · cites this paper as Wheeldon & Levelt, 1995

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

5 of the 85 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 10

  1. CUTLER, A., MEHLER, J., NORRIS, D., & SEGUI, J. (1986). The syllables differing role in the segmen- tation of English and French. Journal of Memory and Language, 25, 385^100.
  2. DE GROOT, A. M. B. (1992). Bilingual lexical repre- sentation: A closer look at conceptual representa- tions. In R. Frost and L. Katz (Eds). Orthogra- phy, Phonology, Morphology, and Meaning. Elsevier Science Publishers B. V.
  3. JONGMAN, A., & SERENO, J. A. (1992). Compensatory effects due to vowel length. Proceedings of the International Congress of Phonetics, 2, 294-297.
  4. V. A. Fromkin (Ed.) Errors in linguistic perfor- mance. New York: Academic Press.
  5. MACKAY, D. G. (1982). The problems of flexibility, fluency, and speed-accuracy tradeoff in skilled be- haviour. Psychological Review, 89, 483-506.
  6. MEYER, A. S., & SCHRIEFERS, H. (1991). Phonologi- cal facilitation in picture-word interference exper- iments: effects of stimulus onset asychrony and types of interfering stimuli. Journal of Experimen- tal Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cogni- tion, 17, 1146-1160.
  7. MONSELL, S. (1987). On the relation between lexical input and output pathways for speech. In Allport, D. A., Mackay, D. G., Prinz, W. and Scheerer, E. (Eds.), Language perception and production: Relationships among listening, speaking, reading, and writing. London, Academic Press.
  8. MOTLEY, M. T. (1980). Verification of "Freudian slips" and semantic prearticulatory editing via laboratory induced spoonerisms. In V. A. Fromkin (Ed.), Errors in linguistic performance: Slips of the tongue, ear, pen, and hand. New York: Academic Press.
  9. SHATTUCK-HUFNAGEL, S. (1979). Speech errors as evidence for a serial order mechanism in sentence production. In W. E. Cooper & E. C T. Walker (Eds.), Sentence processing: Psycholinguistic studies presented to Merrill Garrett. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
  10. ZWITSERLOOD, P., SCHRIEFERS, H., L.AHIRI, L., & DONSELAAR, W. VAN (1993). The role of the syl- lable in the perception of spoken Dutch. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 19, 260-271. (Received August 24, 1993) (Revision received April 21, 1994)

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Wheeldon, L. R., & Levelt, W. J. M.
Affiliations
  • Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics (NL)
  • Max Planck Society (DE)
ORCID
Wheeldon, L.R.
Venue
Journal of Memory and Language
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
1995-06
Volume
34
Issue
3
Pages
311-334
ISSN
0749-596X (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1006/jmla.1995.1014
OpenAlex
W2119207981
Cited by
286
References
85
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 31 · 2012: 5
FWCI
12.74
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)
Locations
  • Journal of Memory and Language (publishedVersion)
  • MPG.PuRe (Max Planck Society) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Max Planck Digital Library (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Radboud Repository (Radboud University) (submittedVersion)
  • Radboud Repository (Radboud University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Phonetics and Phonology Research
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Reading and Literacy Development
Keywords
phonological encoding, speech production, production monitoring, syllabification

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review