Cargando…

Rhythmic tapping difficulties in adults who stutter: A deficit in beat perception, motor execution, or sensorimotor integration?

OBJECTIVES: The study aims to better understand the rhythmic abilities of people who stutter and to identify which processes potentially are impaired in this population: (1) beat perception and reproduction; (2) the execution of movements, in particular their initiation; (3) sensorimotor integration...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Slis, Anneke, Savariaux, Christophe, Perrier, Pascal, Garnier, Maëva
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9897587/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36735662
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0276691
_version_ 1784882282141581312
author Slis, Anneke
Savariaux, Christophe
Perrier, Pascal
Garnier, Maëva
author_facet Slis, Anneke
Savariaux, Christophe
Perrier, Pascal
Garnier, Maëva
author_sort Slis, Anneke
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: The study aims to better understand the rhythmic abilities of people who stutter and to identify which processes potentially are impaired in this population: (1) beat perception and reproduction; (2) the execution of movements, in particular their initiation; (3) sensorimotor integration. MATERIAL AND METHOD: Finger tapping behavior of 16 adults who stutter (PWS) was compared with that of 16 matching controls (PNS) in five rhythmic tasks of various complexity: three synchronization tasks ― a simple 1:1 isochronous pattern, a complex non-isochronous pattern, and a 4 tap:1 beat isochronous pattern ―, a reaction task to an aperiodic and unpredictable pattern, and a reproduction task of an isochronous pattern after passively listening. RESULTS: PWS were able to reproduce an isochronous pattern on their own, without external auditory stimuli, with similar accuracy as PNS, but with increased variability. This group difference in variability was observed immediately after passive listening, without prior motor engagement, and was not enhanced or reduced after several seconds of tapping. Although PWS showed increased tapping variability in the reproduction task as well as in synchronization tasks, this timing variability did not correlate significantly with the variability in reaction times or tapping force. Compared to PNS, PWS exhibited larger negative mean asynchronies, and increased synchronization variability in synchronization tasks. These group differences were not affected by beat hierarchy (i.e., “strong” vs. “weak” beats), pattern complexity (non-isochronous vs. isochronous) or presence versus absence of external auditory stimulus (1:1 vs. 1:4 isochronous pattern). Differences between PWS and PNS were not enhanced or reduced with sensorimotor learning, over the first taps of a synchronization task. CONCLUSION: Our observations support the hypothesis of a deficit in neuronal oscillators coupling in production, but not in perception, of rhythmic patterns, and a larger delay in multi-modal feedback processing for PWS.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9897587
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-98975872023-02-04 Rhythmic tapping difficulties in adults who stutter: A deficit in beat perception, motor execution, or sensorimotor integration? Slis, Anneke Savariaux, Christophe Perrier, Pascal Garnier, Maëva PLoS One Research Article OBJECTIVES: The study aims to better understand the rhythmic abilities of people who stutter and to identify which processes potentially are impaired in this population: (1) beat perception and reproduction; (2) the execution of movements, in particular their initiation; (3) sensorimotor integration. MATERIAL AND METHOD: Finger tapping behavior of 16 adults who stutter (PWS) was compared with that of 16 matching controls (PNS) in five rhythmic tasks of various complexity: three synchronization tasks ― a simple 1:1 isochronous pattern, a complex non-isochronous pattern, and a 4 tap:1 beat isochronous pattern ―, a reaction task to an aperiodic and unpredictable pattern, and a reproduction task of an isochronous pattern after passively listening. RESULTS: PWS were able to reproduce an isochronous pattern on their own, without external auditory stimuli, with similar accuracy as PNS, but with increased variability. This group difference in variability was observed immediately after passive listening, without prior motor engagement, and was not enhanced or reduced after several seconds of tapping. Although PWS showed increased tapping variability in the reproduction task as well as in synchronization tasks, this timing variability did not correlate significantly with the variability in reaction times or tapping force. Compared to PNS, PWS exhibited larger negative mean asynchronies, and increased synchronization variability in synchronization tasks. These group differences were not affected by beat hierarchy (i.e., “strong” vs. “weak” beats), pattern complexity (non-isochronous vs. isochronous) or presence versus absence of external auditory stimulus (1:1 vs. 1:4 isochronous pattern). Differences between PWS and PNS were not enhanced or reduced with sensorimotor learning, over the first taps of a synchronization task. CONCLUSION: Our observations support the hypothesis of a deficit in neuronal oscillators coupling in production, but not in perception, of rhythmic patterns, and a larger delay in multi-modal feedback processing for PWS. Public Library of Science 2023-02-03 /pmc/articles/PMC9897587/ /pubmed/36735662 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0276691 Text en © 2023 Slis et al https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Slis, Anneke
Savariaux, Christophe
Perrier, Pascal
Garnier, Maëva
Rhythmic tapping difficulties in adults who stutter: A deficit in beat perception, motor execution, or sensorimotor integration?
title Rhythmic tapping difficulties in adults who stutter: A deficit in beat perception, motor execution, or sensorimotor integration?
title_full Rhythmic tapping difficulties in adults who stutter: A deficit in beat perception, motor execution, or sensorimotor integration?
title_fullStr Rhythmic tapping difficulties in adults who stutter: A deficit in beat perception, motor execution, or sensorimotor integration?
title_full_unstemmed Rhythmic tapping difficulties in adults who stutter: A deficit in beat perception, motor execution, or sensorimotor integration?
title_short Rhythmic tapping difficulties in adults who stutter: A deficit in beat perception, motor execution, or sensorimotor integration?
title_sort rhythmic tapping difficulties in adults who stutter: a deficit in beat perception, motor execution, or sensorimotor integration?
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9897587/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36735662
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0276691
work_keys_str_mv AT slisanneke rhythmictappingdifficultiesinadultswhostutteradeficitinbeatperceptionmotorexecutionorsensorimotorintegration
AT savariauxchristophe rhythmictappingdifficultiesinadultswhostutteradeficitinbeatperceptionmotorexecutionorsensorimotorintegration
AT perrierpascal rhythmictappingdifficultiesinadultswhostutteradeficitinbeatperceptionmotorexecutionorsensorimotorintegration
AT garniermaeva rhythmictappingdifficultiesinadultswhostutteradeficitinbeatperceptionmotorexecutionorsensorimotorintegration