Advertisement

Sensorimotor training modulates automatic imitation of visual speech

  • Yuchunzi WuEmail author
  • Bronwen G. Evans
  • Patti Adank
Article
  • 27 Downloads

Abstract

The observation-execution links underlying automatic-imitation processes are suggested to result from associative sensorimotor experience of performing and watching the same actions. Past research supporting the associative sequence learning (ASL) model has demonstrated that sensorimotor training modulates automatic imitation of perceptually transparent manual actions, but ASL has been criticized for not being able to account for opaque actions, such as orofacial movements that include visual speech. To investigate whether the observation-execution links underlying opaque actions are as flexible as has been demonstrated for transparent actions, we tested whether sensorimotor training modulated the automatic imitation of visual speech. Automatic imitation was defined as a facilitation in response times for syllable articulation (ba or da) when in the presence of a compatible visual speech distractor, relative to when in the presence of an incompatible distractor. Participants received either mirror (say /ba/ when the speaker silently says /ba/, and likewise for /da/) or countermirror (say /da/ when the speaker silently says /ba/, and vice versa) training, and automatic imitation was measured before and after training. The automatic-imitation effect was enhanced following mirror training and reduced following countermirror training, suggesting that sensorimotor learning plays a critical role in linking speech perception and production, and that the links between these two systems remain flexible in adulthood. Additionally, as compared to manual movements, automatic imitation of speech was susceptible to mirror training but was relatively resilient to countermirror training. We propose that social factors and the multimodal nature of speech might account for the resilience to countermirror training of sensorimotor associations of speech actions.

Keywords

Automatic imitation Speech perception Speech production Sensorimotor learning 

Notes

Author note

This work was supported by a grant of the China Scholarship Council to the first author and by the BIAL Foundation under Grant No. 267/14 to P.A.

Open practices statement

The data and materials for this experiment are available upon request, and no experiment was preregistered.

Supplementary material

13423_2019_1623_MOESM1_ESM.docx (41 kb)
ESM 1 (DOCX 40.8 kb)

References

  1. Adank, P., Hagoort, P., & Bekkering, H. (2010). Imitation improves language comprehension. Psychological Science, 21, 1903–1909.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Adank, P., Nuttall, H., Bekkering, H., & Maegherman, G. (2018). Effects of stimulus response compatibility on covert imitation of vowels. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 80, 1290–1299.  https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-018-1501-3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Boersma, P., & Weenink, D. (2018). Praat: Doing phonetics by computer [Computer program]. Retrieved from www.praat.org
  4. Buccino, G., Vogt, S., Ritzl, A., Fink, G. R., Zilles, K., Freund, H. J., & Rizzolatti, G. (2004). Neural circuits underlying imitation learning of hand actions: An event-related fMRI study. Neuron, 42, 323–334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Carr, L., Iacoboni, M., Dubeau, M.-C., Mazziotta, J. C., & Lenzi, G. L. (2003). Neural mechanisms of empathy in humans: A relay from neural systems for imitation to limbic areas. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 100, 5497–5502.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Casile, A., Caggiano, V., & Ferrari, P. F. (2011). The mirror neuron system: A fresh view. Neuroscientist, 17, 524–538.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Catmur, C. (2013). Sensorimotor learning and the ontogeny of the mirror neuron system. Neuroscience Letters, 540, 21–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Catmur, C., Walsh, V., & Heyes, C. (2009). Associative sequence learning: The role of experience in the development of imitation and the mirror system. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological Sciences, 364, 2369–2380.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cracco, E., Bardi, L., Desmet, C., Genschow, O., Rigoni, D., De Coster, L., . . . Brass, M. (2018). Automatic imitation: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 144, 453–500.Google Scholar
  10. Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Buchner, A., & Lang, A.-G. (2009). Statistical power analyses using G*Power 3.1: Tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behavior Research Methods, 41, 1149–1160.  https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.41.4.1149 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Ferrari, P. F., Gerbella, M., Coudé, G., & Rozzi, S. (2017). Two different mirror neuron networks: The sensorimotor (hand) and limbic (face) pathways. Neuroscience, 358, 300–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gallese, V., Fadiga, L., Fogassi, L., & Rizzolatti, G. (1996). Action recognition in the premotor cortex. Brain, 119, 593–609.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hari, R., Forss, N., Avikainen, S., Kirveskari, E., Salenius, S., & Rizzolatti, G. (1998). Activation of human primary motor cortex during action observation: A neuromagnetic study. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 95, 15061–15065.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Heyes, C. (2005). Imitation by association. In S. Hurley & N. Chater (Eds.), Perspectives on imitation: From neuroscience to social science. Vol. 1: Mechanisms of imitation and imitation in animals (pp. 157–176). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  15. Heyes, C. (2010). Where do mirror neurons come from? Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 34, 575–583.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Heyes, C. (2011). Automatic imitation. Psychological Bulletin, 137, 463–483.  https://doi.org/10.1037/a0022288 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Heyes, C., Bird, G., Johnson, H., & Haggard, P. (2005). Experience modulates automatic imitation. Cognitive Brain Research, 22, 233–240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kerzel, D., & Bekkering, H. (2000). Motor activation from visible speech: Evidence from stimulus response compatibility. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 26, 634–647.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.26.2.634 Google Scholar
  19. Meltzoff, A. N. (2002). Elements of a developmental theory of imitation. In A. N. Meltzoff & W. Prinz (Eds.), The imitative mind development, evolution and brain bases (pp. 19–41). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Molenberghs, P., Cunnington, R., & Mattingley, J. B. (2012). Brain regions with mirror properties: A meta-analysis of 125 human fMRI studies. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 36, 341–349.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Mukamel, R., Ekstrom, A. D., Kaplan, J., Iacoboni, M., & Fried, I. (2010). Single-neuron responses in humans during execution and observation of actions. Current Biology, 20, 750–756.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Pickering, M. J., & Garrod, S. (2013). An integrated theory of language production and comprehension. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 36, 329–347.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Press, C., Gillmeister, H., & Heyes, C. (2007). Sensorimotor experience enhances automatic imitation of robotic action. Proceedings of the Royal Society B, 274, 2509–2514.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Ray, E., & Heyes, C. (2011). Imitation in infancy: The wealth of the stimulus. Developmental Science, 14, 92–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Schmitz, J., Bartoli, E., Maffongelli, L., Fadiga, L., Sebastian-Galles, N., & D’Ausilio, A. (2018). Motor cortex compensates for lack of sensory and motor experience during auditory speech perception. Neuropsychologia. Advance online publication.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2018.01.006
  26. Skipper, J. I., Devlin, J. T., & Lametti, D. R. (2017). The hearing ear is always found close to the speaking tongue: Review of the role of the motor system in speech perception. Brain and Language, 164, 77–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Stürmer, B., Aschersleben, G., & Prinz, W. (2000). Correspondence effects with manual gestures and postures: A study of imitation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 26, 1746–1759.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.26.6.1746 Google Scholar
  28. Swaminathan, S., MacSweeney, M., Boyles, R., Waters, D., Watkins, K. E., & Möttönen, R. (2013). Motor excitability during visual perception of known and unknown spoken languages. Brain and Language, 126, 1–7.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandl.2013.03.002 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Psychonomic Society, Inc. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Speech, Hearing & Phonetic SciencesUniversity College LondonLondonUK

Personalised recommendations