Influences of speaking task demands on sensorimotor oscillations in adults who stutter: Implications for speech motor control

Edward C Brown; Andrew Bowers; M Blake Rafferty; Devin M Casenhiser; Kevin Reilly; Ashley Harkrider; Tim Saltuklaroglu

doi:10.1016/j.clinph.2024.10.017

Influences of speaking task demands on sensorimotor oscillations in adults who stutter: Implications for speech motor control

Clin Neurophysiol. 2024 Nov 10:S1388-2457(24)00322-5. doi: 10.1016/j.clinph.2024.10.017. Online ahead of print.

Authors

Edward C Brown¹, Andrew Bowers², M Blake Rafferty³, Devin M Casenhiser¹, Kevin Reilly¹, Ashley Harkrider¹, Tim Saltuklaroglu⁴

Affiliations

¹ University of Tennessee Health Science Center, The Department of Audiology and Speech Pathology, Knoxville, TN, USA.
² University of Arkansas, Epley Center for Health Professions, Fayetteville, AR, USA.
³ New Mexico State University, Department of Communication Disorders, Las Cruces, NM, USA.
⁴ University of Tennessee Health Science Center, The Department of Audiology and Speech Pathology, Knoxville, TN, USA. Electronic address: tsaltukl@uthsc.edu.

PMID: 39580313
DOI: 10.1016/j.clinph.2024.10.017

Abstract

Objective: Motivated by previous inconsistent findings, this study aims to improve understanding of sensorimotor beta (β; 15-30 Hz) and alpha (α; 8-14 Hz) speech-related power differences between stuttering and non-stuttering adults.

Methods: Electroencephalography was recorded as adults who stutter (AWS) and matched fluent controls answered questions in Quiet and Informational Masked backgrounds. Bilateral sensorimotor β and α power during speech planning and execution were measured from mu (μ) rhythm components.

Results: Compared to controls, AWS exhibited reduced left hemisphere β and α power in both speaking conditions during speech planning and execution. AWS displayed reduced left α power in the Informational Masking compared to Quiet. Within AWS β and α power, which were tightly coupled, oppositely predicted stuttering severity and β-α dissociation (β minus α) was the strongest predictor.

Conclusion: Neither β nor α power are reliable markers of speech motor stability due to their sensitivity to speech task automaticity. However, relationships between these two sensorimotor rhythms warrant further investigation for understanding motor control.

Significance: Data help explain previous mixed findings in reference to extant models of speech motor control in stuttering and may have clinical implications for developing neurostimulation protocols targeting improved speech fluency.

Keywords: EEG; Neural oscillations; Speech execution; Speech motor control; Speech planning; Stuttering.