Auditory feedback in learning and maintenance of vocal behaviour
Abstract
Songbirds are one of the best-studied examples of vocal learners. Learning of both human speech and birdsong depends on hearing. Once learned, adult song in many species remains unchanging, suggesting a reduced influence of sensory experience. Recent studies have revealed, however, that adult song is not always stable, extending our understanding of the mechanisms involved in song maintenance, and their similarity to those active during song learning. Here we review some of the processes that contribute to song learning and production, with an emphasis on the role of auditory feedback. We then consider some of the possible neural substrates involved in these processes, particularly basal ganglia circuitry. Although a thorough treatment of human speech is beyond the scope of this article, we point out similarities between speech and song learning, and ways in which studies of these disparate behaviours complement each other in developing an understanding of general principles that contribute to learning and maintenance of vocal behaviour.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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 bird is thought to fine-tune its song during the second phase by comparing auditory feedback of its own vocalizations with copies of tutors' songs that are stored in memory.
“The bird is thought to fine-tune its song during this phase by comparing auditory feedback of its own vocalizations with copies of tutors’ songs that are stored in memory.”
From Corollary discharge across the animal kingdom (2008) · cites this paper as [68]
Corollary discharge seems to have a key role during the second phase of vocal learning.
“CD seems to have a key role during the second phase of vocal learning68,69.”
From Corollary discharge across the animal kingdom (2008) · cites this paper as [68]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 110 · Cited by 314
- Authors
- Brainard, M. S., & Doupe, A. J.
- Affiliations
- University of California, San Francisco (US)
- ORCID
- Brainard, Michael S.
- Venue
- Nature Reviews Neuroscience
- Published
- 2000-10
- Volume
- 1
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 31-40
- ISSN
- 1471-003X (ISSN-L)
- 1471-0048
- OpenAlex
- W1542750461
- Cited by
- 314
- References
- 110
- Citations by year
- 2026: 8 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 19 · 2020: 20 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 17 · 2012: 14
- FWCI
- 1.51
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Licence
- www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
- Locations
- Nature reviews. Neuroscience (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Burroughs Wellcome Fund
- John Merck Fund
- Life Sciences Research Foundation
- National Institutes of Health
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Developmental Biology › Animal Vocal Communication and Behavior
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Music Perception
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Phonetics and Phonology Research
- Keywords
- auditory feedback, vocal learning, songbirds, bird song, basal ganglia, phonation, speech learning
- MeSH terms
- Acoustic Stimulation, Animals, Auditory Pathways, Basal Ganglia, Behavior, Animal, Feedback, Humans, Learning, Speech, Vocalization, Animal, Prosencephalon, Songbirds
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