Cited by 469Neurobiology of Language and BilingualismPhonetics and Phonology ResearchLanguage Development and Disorders

Detection of errors during speech production: a review of speech monitoring models.

Postma, Albert·2000·Cognition

Abstract

In this paper three theories of speech monitoring are evaluated. The perception-based approach proposes that the same mechanism employed in understanding other-produced language, the speech comprehension system, is also used to monitor one's own speech production. A conceptual, an inner, and an auditory loop convey information to a central, conscious monitor which scrutinizes the adequacy of the ongoing speech flow. In this model, only the end-products in the speech production sequences, the preverbal (propositional) message, the phonetic plan, and the auditory results, are verified. The production-based account assumes multiple local, autonomous monitoring devices, which can look inside formulation components. Moreover, these devices might be tuned to various signals from the actual speech motor execution, e.g. efferent, tactile, and proprioceptive feedback. Finally, node structure theory views error detection as a natural outflow of the activation patterns in the node system for speech production. Errors result in prolonged activation of uncommitted nodes, which in turn may incite error awareness. The approaches differ on the points of consciousness, volition and control, the number of monitoring channels, and their speed, flexibility, and capacity, and whether they can account for concurrent language comprehension disorders. From the empirical evidence presently available, it is argued for a central perception-based monitor, potentially augmented with a few automatic, prod…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0010-0277(00)00090-1

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 121 · Cited by 469

Authors
Postma, A.
Affiliations
Utrecht University (NL)
Corresponding author
Postma, Albert
Venue
Cognition
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2000-11
Volume
77
Issue
2
Pages
97-132
ISSN
0010-0277 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1970539221
Cited by
469
References
121
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 29 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 17 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 36 · 2019: 21 · 2018: 16 · 2017: 20 · 2016: 20 · 2015: 21 · 2014: 42 · 2013: 28 · 2012: 19
FWCI
4.13
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Cognition (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Phonetics and Phonology Research
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Language Development and Disorders
Keywords
speech monitoring, error detection, speech production, speech understanding, error awareness, auditory feedback, proprioceptive feedback, tactile feedback, volition
MeSH terms
Humans, Language Development, Models, Psychological, Phonetics, Speech, Speech Intelligibility, Speech Perception

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