Sensorimotor Integration in Speech Processing: Computational Basis and Neural Organization

By Gregory Hickok, John F. Houde, Feng Rong. Neuron, 2011

763 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Sensorimotor integration is an active domain of speech research and is characterized by two main ideas, that the auditory system is critically involved in speech production, and that the motor system is critically involved in speech perception. Despite the complementarity of these ideas, there is little crosstalk between these literatures. We propose an integrative model of the speech-related “dorsal stream” in which sensorimotor interaction primarily supports speech production, in the form of a state feedback control architecture. A critical component of this control system is forward sensory prediction, which affords a natural mechanism for limited motor influence on perception, as recent perceptual research has suggested. Evidence shows that this influence is modulatory but not necessary for speech perception. The neuroanatomy of the proposed circuit is discussed as well as some probable clinical correlates including conduction aphasia, stuttering, and aspects of schizophrenia.

Subfields: Cognitive Neuroscience, Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, Social Psychology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/35779455d7cb755fa0cbaaa8f870c584f0d63342

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Cognitive Neuroscience

In Experimental and Cognitive Psychology

In Social Psychology

Citations in the corpus

The Effect of Imagination on Stimulation: The Functional Specificity of Efference Copies in Speech Processing (2013, background): “Recent work on speech production has yielded strong claims about the existence and role of efference copies (Hickok et al., 2011; Price, Crinion, & MacSweeney, 2011; Tian & Poeppel, 2010; Guenther et al., 2006), but the extent to which such representations are functionally specific has not been…”
A review and synthesis of the first 20 years of PET and fMRI studies of heard speech, spoken language and reading (2012, background): “Explanations for why activation in these areas is greater for implausible sentences include the following: (a) activation in the left premotor cortex reflects covert articulatory processing (Rogalsky et al., 2008; Iacoboni, 2008; Callan et al., 2010; Osnes et al., 2011; Adank and Devlin, 2010; Meist”
Speech Production as State Feedback Control (2011, background): “This has led to refined looped and “dual stream” models of speech processing (Hickok and Poeppel, 2007; Rauschecker and Scott, 2009; Hickok et al., 2011) with a ventral stream serving speech comprehension and a dorsal stream serving feedback processing related to speaking.”
Converging toward a common speech code: imitative and perceptuo-motor recalibration processes in speech production (2013, neutral): “…motor parameters (Guenther, 1995; Perkell et al., 1997; Guenther et al., 1998; Houde and Jordan, 1998; for recent reviews, see Perkell et al., 2000; Guenther, 2006; Hickok et al., 2011; Houde and Nagarajan, 2011; Guenther and Vladusich, 2012; Hickok, 2012; Perkell, 2012; Perrier, 2012).”
Mental imagery of speech: linking motor and perceptual systems through internal simulation and estimation (2012, result): “We suggest, along the lines of similar theories (Max et al., 2004; Hickok et al., 2011), that one of the neural mechanisms causing stuttering is a deficit in the motor-to-sensory transformation.”
Computational neuroanatomy of speech production (2012, methodology): “My colleagues and I have already sketched a first attempt at an integration of the psycholinguistic and motor control literatures 41 .”
Bridging verbal coordination and neural dynamics (2025, unknown): “…into predictive models of speech motor control, where the brain generates an internal estimate of production and corrects errors when auditory feedback deviates from the estimate (Hickok et al., 2011; Houde & Nagarajan, 2011; Tourville & Guenther, 2011; Ozker et al., 2022; Floegel et al., 2023).”
Intracranial Mapping of Response Latencies and Task Effects for Spoken Syllable Processing in the Human Brain (2024, unknown): “Furthermore, our findings are also consistent with increased engagement of sensorimotor areas like left-hemisphere IFG during phoneme categorization tasks (Hickok et al., 2011; Skipper et al., 2017).”