MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1984962248 · doi:10.1080/00222895.2011.628347

Speech Motor Skill and Stuttering

2011· review· en· W1984962248 on OpenAlexafffund
Aravind Kumar Namasivayam, Pascal van Lieshout

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Motor Behavior · 2011
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicStuttering Research and Treatment
Canadian institutionsThe Speech and Stuttering InstituteToronto Rehabilitation InstituteUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsStutteringPsychologyCognitive psychologySpeech productionMotor skillCognitionDevelopmental psychologyComputer scienceSpeech recognitionNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The authors review converging lines of evidence from behavioral, kinematic, and neuroimaging data that point to limitations in speech motor skills in people who stutter (PWS). From their review, they conclude that PWS differ from those who do not in terms of their ability to improve with practice and retain practiced changes in the long term, and that they are less efficient and less flexible in their adaptation to lower (motor) and higher (cognitive-linguistic) order requirements that impact on speech motor functions. These findings in general provide empirical support for the position that PWS may occupy the low end of the speech motor skill continuum as argued in the Speech Motor Skills approach (Van Lieshout, Hulstijn, & Peters, 2004).

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.140
GPT teacher head0.438
Teacher spread0.297 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations105
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Motor BehaviorSame topicStuttering Research and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207