The DOI matches its Crossref record; 64 of the 64 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Covert Repair Hypothesis: Prearticulatory Repair Processes in Normal and Stuttered Disfluencies
Abstract
Self-repairing of speech errors demonstrates that speakers possess a monitoring device with which they verify the correctness of the speech flow. There is substantial evidence that this speech monitor not only comprises an auditory component (i.e., hearing one’s own speech), but also an internal part: inspection of the speech program prior to its motoric execution. Errors thus may be detected before they are actually articulated. In the covert repair hypothesis of disfluency, this internal error detection possibility has been extended with an internal correction counterpart. Basically, the covert repair hypothesis contends that disfluencies reflect the interfering side-effects of covert, prearticulatory repairing of speech programming errors on the ongoing speech. Internally detecting and correcting an error obstructs the concurrent articulation in such manner that a disfluent speech event will result. Further, it is shown how, by combining a small number of typical overt self-repair features such as interrupting after error detection, retracing in an utterance, and marking the correction with editing terms, one can parsimoniously account for the specific forms disfluencies are known to take. This reasoning is argued to apply to both normal and stuttered disfluency. With respect to the crucial question concerning what makes stuttering speakers so greatly disfluent, it is hypothesized that their abilities to generate error-free speech programs are disordered. Hence, abundant stuttering derives from the need to repeatedly repair one’s speech programs before their speech motor execution.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Speaking: From Intention to Articulation
Levelt, W. J. M. (1989) · doi:10.7551/mitpress/6393.001.0001 · Cited by 4,804
Speaking. From Intention to Articulation
Caplan, D. (1990) · Trends in Neurosciences · doi:10.1016/0166-2236(90)90151-y · Cited by 4,008
A spreading-activation theory of retrieval in sentence production.
Dell, G. S. (1986) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037//0033-295x.93.3.283 · Cited by 3,236
Categorization of action slips
Norman, D. A. (1981) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.88.1.1 · Cited by 1,736
Monitoring and self-repair in speech.
Levelt, W. (1983) · Cognition · doi:10.1016/0010-0277(83)90026-4 · Cited by 1,676
The “tip of the tongue” phenomenon
Brown, R., & McNeill, D. (1966) · Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior · doi:10.1016/s0022-5371(66)80040-3 · Cited by 1,294
The Lombard Sign and the Role of Hearing in Speech
Lane, H., & Tranel, B. (1971) · Journal of Speech and Hearing Research · doi:10.1044/jshr.1404.677 · Cited by 744
Speech Errors as Linguistic Evidence
Goyvaerts, D. L., & Fromkin, V. A. (1976) · Language · doi:10.2307/413308 · Cited by 527
Cerebral mechanisms in behavior
Brazier, M. A. B. (1952) · Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology · doi:10.1016/0013-4694(52)90070-9 · Cited by 505
The problems of flexibility, fluency, and speed-accuracy trade-off in skilled behavior
MacKay, D. G. (1982) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.89.5.483 · Cited by 490
Cited by
Detection of errors during speech production: a review of speech monitoring models.
Postma, A. (2000) · Cognition · doi:10.1016/s0010-0277(00)00090-1 · Cited by 469
Self-citationError Monitoring in Speech Production: A Computational Test of the Perceptual Loop Theory
Hartsuiker, R. J., & Kolk, H. H. J. (2001) · Cognitive Psychology · doi:10.1006/cogp.2000.0744 · Cited by 270
Self-citationFluency Bank: A new resource for fluency research and practice
Bernstein Ratner, N., & MacWhinney, B. (2018) · Journal of Fluency Disorders · doi:10.1016/j.jfludis.2018.03.002 · Cited by 124
Smith, A., Goffman, L., Sasisekaran, J., & Weber-Fox, C. (2012) · Journal of Fluency Disorders · doi:10.1016/j.jfludis.2012.06.001 · Cited by 114
Childhood stuttering and dissociations across linguistic domains
Anderson, J. D., Pellowski, M. W., & Conture, E. G. (2005) · Journal of Fluency Disorders · doi:10.1016/j.jfludis.2005.05.006 · Cited by 91
Metadata
- Authors
- Postma, A., & Kolk, H.
- Venue
- Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research
- Published
- 1993-06
- Volume
- 36
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 472-487
- ISSN
- 1092-4388 (ISSN-L)
- 1558-9102
- OpenAlex
- W4293088276
- Cited by
- 425
- References
- 64
- FWCI
- 8.34
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The Covert Repair Hypothesis: Prearticulatory Repair Processes in Normal and Stuttered Disfluencies. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1044/jshr.3603.472
- The paper
- Postma, A., & Kolk, H. (1993). The Covert Repair Hypothesis: Prearticulatory Repair Processes in Normal and Stuttered Disfluencies. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research. https://doi.org/10.1044/jshr.3603.472
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.