Cited by 5Schizophrenia research and treatmentFree Will and AgencyNeuroscience and Music Perception

Vocalizing and singing reveal complex patterns of corollary discharge function in schizophrenia

Open access
Ford, Judith M., Roach, Brian J., Mathalon, Daniel H.·2021·International Journal of Psychophysiology

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: As we vocalize, our brains generate predictions of the sounds we produce to enable suppression of neural responses when intentions match vocalizations and to make adjustments when they do not. This may be instantiated by efference copy and corollary discharge mechanisms, which are impaired in people with schizophrenia (SZ). Although innate, these mechanisms can be affected by intentions. We asked if attending to pitch during vocalizations would take these mechanisms "off-line" and reduce suppression. METHODS: Event-related potentials (ERP) were recorded from 96 SZ and 92 healthy controls (HC) as they vocalized triplets in monotone (Phrase) or sang triplets in ascending thirds (Pitch). Pre-vocalization activity (Bereitschaftspotential, BP), N1, and P2 ERP components to sounds were compared during vocalization and playback. RESULTS: N1 was not as suppressed during Pitch as during Phrase. N1 suppression was not affected by SZ in either task when all data were collapsed across pitches (Pitch) and positions (Phrase). However, when binned according to vocalization performance, SZ showed less N1 suppression than HC at longer (>2 s) inter-stimulus intervals (Phrase) and inconsistent suppression across pitches (Pitch). Unlike N1, P2 was more suppressed during Pitch than Phrase and not affected by SZ. BP was greater during vocalization than playback but did not contribute to N1 or P2 effects. Pitch variability was inversely related to negative symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: Neural processing is not suppressed when patients and controls sing, and corollary discharge abnormalities in schizophrenia are only seen at long vocalization intervals.

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 · 10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2021.02.013

Cites

7 of 7 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?

  • At higher ends of egocentricity and intentionality, inner speech may be generated predominantly by corollary discharge, which may also attenuate neural activity within speech perception areas.

    “At higher ends of these dimensions, inner speech may be generated predominantly by corollary discharge, which may also attenuate neural activity within speech perception areas (Ford et al., 2021; Hurlburt et al., 2016; Leube et al., 2010; Shergill et al., 2013).”

    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 Ford et al., 2021

    Section 1.7 links corollary-discharge mechanisms to predictions about the sensory consequences of covert behavior, including inner speech. Section 1.4 links corollary discharge to suppression of the auditory N1 response to spoken sound. The paper does not say that corollary discharge predominantly generates inner speech at higher levels of egocentricity and intentionality, or establish attenuation during inner speech specifically. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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

Research works printed but not linked: 8

  1. Crowley, K.E., Colrain, I.M., 2004. A review of the evidence for P2 being an independent component process: age, sleep and modality. Clin. Neurophysiol. 115, 732-744.
  2. Gonzalez, S., Brookes, M., 2011. A pitch estimation filter robust to high levels of noise (PEFAC). In: 2011 19th European Signal Processing Conference. IEEE, pp. 451-455.
  3. Gruesser, O.-J., 1995. On the history of the ideas of efference copy and reafference, in: Debru, C. (Ed.), Essays in the History of the Physiological Sciences. Rodopi, Amsterdam-Atlanta, GA, pp. 35-55.
  4. Helmholtz, H., 1925. Movements of the eyes, chapter 27, in: Southall, J.P.C. (Ed.), Helmholtz's Treatise on Physiological Optics, Vol. III, Translated From the Third German Edition ed. Optical Society of America, Rochester, NY, pp. 37-154.
  5. Kim, J.H., Larson, C.R., 2019. Modulation of auditory-vocal feedback control due to planned changes in voice fo. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 145 (3), 1482.
  6. Schneider, D.M., Mooney, R., 2018. How movement modulates hearing. Annu. Rev. Neurosci. 41, 553-572. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-neuro-072116-031215. · DOI
  7. Sherrington, C.S., 1900. The muscular sense., in: Schafer, E.A. (Ed.), Textbook of Physiology, vol. 2. Pentland, Edinburgh/London, pp. 1022-1025.
  8. Sperry, R.W., 1950. Neural basis of the spontaneous optokinetic response produced by visual inversion. Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology 43, 482-489.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Ford, J. M., Roach, B. J., & Mathalon, D. H.
Affiliations
San Francisco VA Medical Center (US)
Corresponding author
Ford, Judith M.
Venue
International Journal of Psychophysiology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2021-06
Volume
164
Pages
30-40
ISSN
0167-8760 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3129568185
Cited by
5
References
7
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 1
FWCI
0.54
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • International Journal of Psychophysiology (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Northern California Institute for Research and Education
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Schizophrenia research and treatment
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Free Will and Agency
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Music Perception
Keywords
schizophrenia, corollary discharge, efference copy, vocalizations, singing, P2, readiness potential, interstimulus interval, negative symptoms, event-related potentials
MeSH terms
Electroencephalography, Evoked Potentials, Evoked Potentials, Auditory, Humans, Patient Discharge, Schizophrenia, Singing

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