Noninvasive Neurostimulation to the Inferior Frontal Sulcus or Cerebellum Improves Accuracy But Not Timing in a Speech Motor Learning Task.

IF 3.7 Q1 LINGUISTICS
Neurobiology of Language Pub Date : 2025-09-24 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.1162/NOL.a.18
Hannah P Rowe, Hilary E Miller, Rebecca M Belisle, Tyler K Perrachione, Frank H Guenther
{"title":"Noninvasive Neurostimulation to the Inferior Frontal Sulcus or Cerebellum Improves Accuracy But Not Timing in a Speech Motor Learning Task.","authors":"Hannah P Rowe, Hilary E Miller, Rebecca M Belisle, Tyler K Perrachione, Frank H Guenther","doi":"10.1162/NOL.a.18","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Speech motor learning depends on phonological working memory mechanisms in left posterior inferior frontal sulcus (LpIFS) and motor learning mechanisms in right cerebellum (RCbm). This study examines how transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), applied focally to these regions, affects speech production speed and accuracy when practicing novel syllables containing non-native consonant clusters. Healthy young adults (<i>N</i> = 105) practiced producing four pseudowords containing non-native clusters (e.g., \"vzutp\") with either anodal stimulation to LpIFS, anodal stimulation to RCbm, or no stimulation (i.e., sham; <i>n</i> = 35 participants per condition). Trained stimuli were produced more quickly and accurately than novel stimuli across all stimulation conditions. Overall accuracy (novel and trained combined) was higher after LpIFS stimulation compared to sham but not significantly different between LpIFS and RCbm stimulation, nor after RCbm stimulation compared to sham. The difference in accuracy between novel and trained stimuli (i.e., trained - novel accuracy) was higher after either LpIFS or RCbm stimulation compared to sham, indicating better learning of syllabic motor programs with excitation of these brain regions. No significant difference in trained - novel accuracy was found between LpIFS and RCbm stimulation. Our measure of speed (i.e., stimulus duration) was not differentially affected by stimulation condition. Taken together, these findings highlight the distinct contributions of phonological and motor learning mechanisms to non-native syllable acquisition and suggest that neural stimulation can enhance learning outcomes. Future research should explore the long-term retention of these effects and examine whether real-time feedback enhances learning outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":34845,"journal":{"name":"Neurobiology of Language","volume":"6 ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12534029/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neurobiology of Language","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1162/NOL.a.18","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Speech motor learning depends on phonological working memory mechanisms in left posterior inferior frontal sulcus (LpIFS) and motor learning mechanisms in right cerebellum (RCbm). This study examines how transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), applied focally to these regions, affects speech production speed and accuracy when practicing novel syllables containing non-native consonant clusters. Healthy young adults (N = 105) practiced producing four pseudowords containing non-native clusters (e.g., "vzutp") with either anodal stimulation to LpIFS, anodal stimulation to RCbm, or no stimulation (i.e., sham; n = 35 participants per condition). Trained stimuli were produced more quickly and accurately than novel stimuli across all stimulation conditions. Overall accuracy (novel and trained combined) was higher after LpIFS stimulation compared to sham but not significantly different between LpIFS and RCbm stimulation, nor after RCbm stimulation compared to sham. The difference in accuracy between novel and trained stimuli (i.e., trained - novel accuracy) was higher after either LpIFS or RCbm stimulation compared to sham, indicating better learning of syllabic motor programs with excitation of these brain regions. No significant difference in trained - novel accuracy was found between LpIFS and RCbm stimulation. Our measure of speed (i.e., stimulus duration) was not differentially affected by stimulation condition. Taken together, these findings highlight the distinct contributions of phonological and motor learning mechanisms to non-native syllable acquisition and suggest that neural stimulation can enhance learning outcomes. Future research should explore the long-term retention of these effects and examine whether real-time feedback enhances learning outcomes.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

对额下沟或小脑的非侵入性神经刺激提高了言语运动学习任务的准确性,但没有提高时间。
言语运动学习依赖于左侧额下后沟的语音工作记忆机制和右侧小脑的运动学习机制。本研究考察了经颅直流电刺激(tDCS)如何在练习包含非母语辅音集群的新音节时影响这些区域的语音生成速度和准确性。健康的年轻成年人(N = 105)练习产生四个包含非本地群集的假词(例如,“vzutp”),分别对LpIFS进行阳极刺激,对RCbm进行阳极刺激,或不进行刺激(即,每个条件N = 35名参与者)。在所有刺激条件下,经过训练的刺激比新刺激产生得更快、更准确。与假手术相比,LpIFS刺激后的总体准确性(新训练和训练相结合)更高,但LpIFS和RCbm刺激之间没有显著差异,RCbm刺激后与假手术相比也没有显著差异。新刺激和训练刺激之间的准确性差异(即训练-新刺激的准确性)在LpIFS或RCbm刺激后比假刺激更高,表明在这些脑区兴奋的情况下,音节运动程序的学习更好。在LpIFS和RCbm刺激之间,未发现训练后的新颖准确性有显著差异。我们的速度测量(即刺激持续时间)没有受到刺激条件的差异影响。综上所述,这些发现突出了语音和运动学习机制对非母语音节习得的独特贡献,并表明神经刺激可以提高学习效果。未来的研究应该探索这些影响的长期保留,并检查实时反馈是否能提高学习效果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Neurobiology of Language
Neurobiology of Language Social Sciences-Linguistics and Language
CiteScore
5.90
自引率
6.20%
发文量
32
审稿时长
17 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书