Lexical bias revisited: Detecting, rejecting and repairing speech errors in inner speech

By Sieb G. Nooteboom. 2005

58 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Cognitive Neuroscience, Developmental and Educational Psychology, Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, Cognitive Science & Psychology, Linguistics

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

1. Ben Alderson-Day
2. Charles Fernyhough
3. Gary S. Dell
4. Gary M. Oppenheim
5. T. Lentz
6. Franklin Chang
7. Timothy Hubbard
8. Gregory Hickok

In Developmental and Educational Psychology

1. Ben Alderson-Day
2. Gary S. Dell
3. Gary M. Oppenheim
4. T. Lentz
5. Charles Fernyhough
6. E. Meins
7. J. Lidstone
8. Franklin Chang

In Experimental and Cognitive Psychology

1. Ben Alderson-Day
2. Charles Fernyhough
3. Gary S. Dell
4. Gary M. Oppenheim
5. T. Lentz

In Cognitive Science & Psychology

1. Ben Alderson-Day
2. Charles Fernyhough
3. Gary S. Dell
4. Gary M. Oppenheim
5. T. Lentz
6. E. Meins
7. Simon McCarthy-Jones
8. Christopher Jarrold

In Linguistics

1. Ben Alderson-Day
2. Gary S. Dell
3. Gary M. Oppenheim
4. T. Lentz
5. Charles Fernyhough

Citations in the corpus

• Inner Speech: Development, Cognitive Functions, Phenomenology, and Neurobiology (2015, background): “…external speech, there is a large body of psycholinguistic research on the role of inner speech as a potential error monitor for external speech (e.g., Hartsuiker & Kolk, 2001; Nooteboom, 2005), a full discussion of which is beyond the scope of this article (see Hickok, 2012, for a review).”
• Impact of Working Memory Constraints on Speech Monitoring in Healthy Children (2013, background): “In 17% of these descriptions, errors in colour naming occurred and of those errors, speakers only corrected 46%; other studies have substantiated this level of correction (Levelt, 1983; Nooteboom, 1980; 2005).”
• Motor movement matters: The flexible abstractness of inner speech (2010, unknown): “…and dissimilar, errors in equal quantities but quickly catch and edit out errors of one kind more than errors of another kind (see also, e.g., Baars, Motley, & MacKay, 1975; Hartsuiker, 2006; Hartsuiker, Corley, & Martensen, 2005; Levelt et al., 1999; Nooteboom, 2005; Nooteboom & Quené, 2008).”
• Inner speech slips exhibit lexical bias, but not the phonemic similarity effect. (2008, background): “…for phonological errors to create words (e.g. REEF LEECH fi LEAF REACH) over nonwords (e.g. WREATH LEAGUE fi LEATH REEG) (Baars, Motley, & MacKay, 1975; Costa, Roelstraete, & Hartsuiker, 2006; Dell, 1986, 1990; Humphreys, 2002; Hartsuiker, Corley, & Martensen, 2005, 2006; Nooteboom, 2005a).”