Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Attention in Speech

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Interaction Between Attention and Language Systems in Humans

  • 865 Accesses

Abstract

As language users we speak about objects and events in the world, make references, express thoughts in sentences or simply name objects. Language production also includes naming aloud objects written in words, albeit this is more artificial to the language system. In any case, generating a name or speaking a sentence must require the symphony of a range of different cognitive processes. Fundamentally, the act of speaking includes selection of concepts and generating a phonological structure leading to articulation. Psycholinguists have developed different models to account for these seemingly mundane but complicated cognitive phenomena. Many of these models have dealt with the simplest forms of language production, that is, naming a picture or reading aloud a word. This chapter will explore how theorists have dealt with attention in understanding cognitive processes related to picture naming and sentence generation. In language production, attentional engagement has been shown to either facilitate or interfere during naming and in the linguistic construction of sentences during sentence production. Most discussions have been around selection of concepts for articulation as well as competition among related lexical words. However, as we will see researchers differ a lot with regard to competition being mandatory before production. The chapter will consider eye tracking data where attention mechanisms during word planning and articulation have been examined.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Abutalebi, J., Della Rosa, P. A., Green, D. W., Hernandez, M., Scifo, P., et al. (2012). Bilingualism tunes the anterior cingulate cortex for conflict monitoring. Cerebral Cortex, 22(9), 2076–2086.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Acheson, D. J., Ganushchak, L. Y., Christoffels, I. K., & Hagoort, P. (2012). Conflict monitoring in speech production: Physiological evidence from bilingual picture naming. Brain and Language, 123(2), 131–136.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Aristei, S., Zwitserlood, P., & Rahman, R. A. (2012). Picture-induced semantic interference reflects lexical competition during object naming. Frontiers in psychology, 3, 28.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Baese-Berk, M., & Goldrick, M. (2009). Mechanisms of interaction in speech production. Language and Cognitive Processes, 24(4), 527–554.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Barch, D. M., Braver, T. S., Sabb, F. W., & Noll, D. C. (2000). Anterior cingulate and the monitoring of response conflict: Evidence from an fMRI study of overt verb generation. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 12(2), 298–309.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bloem, I., & La Heij, W. (2003). Semantic facilitation and semantic interference in word translation: Implications for models of lexical access in language production. Journal of Memory and Language, 48(3), 468–488.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bock, K. (1989). Closed-class immanence in sentence production. Cognition, 31(2), 163–186.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bock, K., & Levelt, W. (2002). Language production. Psycholinguistics: Critical concepts in psychology, 5, 405.

    Google Scholar 

  • Botvinick, M. M., Braver, T. S., Barch, D. M., Carter, C. S., & Cohen, J. D. (2001). Conflict monitoring and cognitive control. Psychological review, 108(3), 624–652.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bulf, H., Valenza, E., & Turati, C. (2013). How a hat may affect 3-Month-Olds’ recognition of a face: An eye-tracking study. PLoS ONE, 8(12), e82839. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0082839.

  • Christoffels, I. K., Formisano, E., & Schiller, N. O. (2007). Neural correlates of verbal feedback processing: An fMRI study employing overt speech. Human Brain Mapping, 28(9), 868–879.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chun, M. M. (2000). Contextual cueing of visual attention. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4(5), 170–178.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Coco, M. I., & Keller, F. (2012). Scan patterns predict sentence production in the cross‐modal processing of visual scenes. Cognitive Science, 36(7), 1204–1223.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coltheart, M. (1999). Modularity and cognition. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 3(3), 115–120.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Costa, A., & Caramazza, A. (1999). Is lexical selection in bilingual speech production language-specific? Further evidence from Spanish–English and English–Spanish bilinguals. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 2(03), 231–244.

    Google Scholar 

  • Costa, A., Miozzo, M., & Caramazza, A. (1999). Lexical selection in bilinguals: Do words in the bilingual’s two lexicons compete for selection? Journal of Memory and Language, 41(3), 365–397.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Costa, A., Alario, F. X., & Caramazza, A. (2005). On the categorical nature of the semantic interference effect in the picture-word interference paradigm. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 12(1), 125–131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • de Zubicaray, G. I., Wilson, S. J., McMahon, K. L., & Muthiah, S. (2001). The semantic interference effect in the picture-word paradigm: An event-related fMRI study employing overt responses. Human Brain Mapping, 14(4), 218–227.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • DeLeon, J., Gottesman, R. F., Kleinman, J. T., & Newhart, M., et al. (2007). Neural regions essential for distinct cognitive processes underlying picture naming. Brain, 130(5), 1408–1422.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dell, G. S. (1986). A spreading-activation theory of retrieval in sentence production. Psychological Review, 93(3), 283–321.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Dell, G. S., & Chang, F. (2014). The P-chain: Relating sentence production and its disorders to comprehension and acquisition. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 369(1634), 20120394.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dell, G. S., Schwartz, M. F., Martin, N., Saffran, E. M., & Gagnon, D. A. (1997). Lexical access in aphasic and nonaphasic speakers. Psychological Review, 104(4), 801–838.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Dell’Acqua, R., Sessa, P., Peressotti, F., Mulatti, C., Navarrete, E., & Grainger, J. (2010). ERP evidence for ultra-fast semantic processing in the picture–word interference paradigm. Frontiers in Psychology, 1, 177. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2010.00177.

  • Dhooge, E., & Hartsuiker, R. J. (2011). The distractor frequency effect in a delayed picture-word interference task: Further evidence for a late locus of distractor exclusion. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 18(1), 116–122.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dhooge, E., & Hartsuiker, R. J. (2012). Lexical selection and verbal self-monitoring: Effects of lexicality, context, and time pressure in picture-word interference. Journal of Memory and Language, 66(1), 163–176.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ferreira, V. S., & Pashler, H. (2002). Central bottleneck influences on the processing stages of word production. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 28(6), 1187–1199.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Friederici, A. D. (2002). Towards a neural basis of auditory sentence processing. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 6(2), 78–84.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ganushchak, L. Y., & Schiller, N. O. (2008). Motivation and semantic context affect brain error-monitoring activity: An event-related brain potentials study. Neuroimage, 39(1), 395–405.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Glaser, W. R., & Düngelhoff, F. J. (1984). The time course of picture-word interference. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 10(5), 640–654.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gleitman, L. R., January, D., Nappa, R., & Trueswell, J. C. (2007). On the give and take between event apprehension and utterance formulation. Journal of Memory and Language, 57(4), 544–569.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Goldrick, M., & Blumstein, S. E. (2006). Cascading activation from phonological planning to articulatory processes: Evidence from tongue twisters. Language and Cognitive Processes, 21(6), 649–683.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gollan, T. H., Montoya, R. I., Fennema-Notestine, C., & Morris, S. K. (2005). Bilingualism affects picture naming but not picture classification. Memory & Cognition, 33(7), 1220–1234.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Green, D. W. (1998). Mental control of the bilingual lexico-semantic system. Bilingualism: Language and cognition, 1(02), 67–81.

    Google Scholar 

  • Griffin, Z. M., & Bock, K. (2000). What the eyes say about speaking. Psychological Science, 11(4), 274–279.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hagen, J. W., & Hale, G. A. (1973). The development of attention in children. ETS Research Bulletin Series, 1973(1), i-37.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harley, T. A. (1993). Connectionist approaches to language disorders. Aphasiology, 7(3), 221–249.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hartsuiker, R. (2014). Monitoring and control of the production system. The Oxford Handbook of Language Production, p. 417.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hartsuiker, R. J., & Kolk, H. H. (2001). Error monitoring in speech production: A computational test of the perceptual loop theory. Cognitive Psychology, 42(2), 113–157.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hashimoto, Y., & Sakai, K. L. (2003). Brain activations during conscious self-monitoring of speech production with delayed auditory feedback: An fMRI study. Human Brain Mapping, 20(1), 22–28.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hickok, G. (2012). Computational neuroanatomy of speech production. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 13(2), 135–145.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hoffman, J. E., & Subramaniam, B. (1995). The role of visual attention in saccadic eye movements. Perception and Psychophysics, 57(6), 787–795.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ibbotson, P., Lieven, E., & Tomasello, M. (2013). The attention-grammar interface: Eye-gaze cues structural choice in children and adults. Cognitive Linguistics, 24(3), 457–481.

    Google Scholar 

  • Indefrey, P., & Levelt, W. J. (2004). The spatial and temporal signatures of word production components. Cognition, 92(1), 101–144.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Jackendoff, R. (2012). A user’s guide to thought and meaning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones, Ō. P., Green, D. W., Grogan, A., Pliatsikas, C., Filippopolitis, K., et al. (2012). Where, when and why brain activation differs for bilinguals and monolinguals during picture naming and reading aloud. Cerebral Cortex, 22(4), 892–902.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kan, I. P., & Thompson-Schill, S. L. (2004). Selection from perceptual and conceptual representations. Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience, 4(4), 466–482.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Knudsen, E. I. (2007). Fundamental components of attention. Annual Review of Neuroscience, 30, 57–78.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • La Heij, W. (1988). Components of Stroop-like interference in picture naming. Memory & Cognition, 16(5), 400–410.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lamers, M. J., & Roelofs, A. (2011). Attentional control adjustments in Eriksen and Stroop task performance can be independent of response conflict. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 64(6), 1056–1081.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Levelt, W. J. M. (1989). Speaking: From intention to articulation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levelt, W. J. (1993). Speaking: From intention to articulation (Vol. 1). Boston, MA: The MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levelt, W. J. (1999). Models of word production. Trends in cognitive sciences, 3(6), 223–232.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lewkowicz, D. J., & Hansen-Tift, A. M. (2012). Infants deploy selective attention to the mouth of a talking face when learning speech. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 109(5), 1431–1436.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lupker, S. J. (1979). The semantic nature of response competition in the picture-word interference task. Memory & Cognition, 7(6), 485–495.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mahon, B. Z., Costa, A., Peterson, R., Vargas, K. A., & Caramazza, A. (2007). Lexical selection is not by competition: A reinterpretation of semantic interference and facilitation effects in the picture-word interference paradigm. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 33(3), 503–535.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Malpass, D., & Meyer, A. S. (2010). The time course of name retrieval during multiple-object naming: Evidence from extrafoveal-on-foveal effects. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 36(2), 523–537.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Marian, V., & Spivey, M. (2003). Competing activation in bilingual language processing: Within-and between-language competition. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 6(02), 97–115.

    Google Scholar 

  • Masaki, H., Tanaka, H., Takasawa, N., & Yamazaki, K. (2001). Error-related brain potentials elicited by vocal errors. NeuroReport, 12(9), 1851–1855.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Medin, D. L., & Ortony, A. (1989). Psychological essentialism. Similarity and analogical reasoning, 179, 195.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mesulam, M. (1990). Large-scale neurocognitive networks and distributed processing for attention, language, and memory. Annals of Neurology, 28(5), 597–613.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, A. S., & Lethaus, F. (2004). The use of eye tracking in studies of sentence generation. In The interface of language, vision, and action: Eye movements and the visual world, pp. 191–211.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, A. S., Sleiderink, A. M., & Levelt, W. J. (1998). Viewing and naming objects: Eye movements during noun phrase production. Cognition, 66(2), B25–B33.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, A. S., Roelofs, A., & Levelt, W. J. (2003). Word length effects in object naming: The role of a response criterion. Journal of Memory and Language, 48(1), 131–147.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, A. S., Wheeldon, L., Van der Meulen, F., & Konopka, A. (2012). Effects of speech rate and practice on the allocation of visual attention in multiple object naming. Frontiers in psychology, 3, 39. doi:10.3389/Ffpsyg.2012.00039.

  • Miller, E. K., & Cohen, J. D. (2001). An integrative theory of prefrontal cortex function. Annual Review of Neuroscience, 24(1), 167–202.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Miozzo, M., & Caramazza, A. (2003). When more is less: A counterintuitive effect of distractor frequency in the picture-word interference paradigm. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 132(2), 228–252.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mishra, R. K. (2009). Interaction of language and visual attention: evidence from production and comprehension. Progress in Brain Research, 176, 277–292.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Mishra, R. K. (2013). Attention in sentence processing: A review. Psychological Studies, 58(3), 308–317.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mishra, R. K., & Singh, S. (2014). Activation of shape and semantic information during ambiguous homophone processing: Eye tracking evidence from Hindi. Cognitive Processing, 15(4), 451–465.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Morgan, J. L., & Meyer, A. S. (2005). Processing of extrafoveal objects during multiple-object naming. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 31(3), 428–442.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Myachykov, A., Garrod, S., & Scheepers, C. (2009). Attention and syntax in sentence production: A critical review. In Discours. Revue de linguistique, psycholinguistique et informatique, Vol. 4.

    Google Scholar 

  • Myachykov, A., Garrod, S., & Scheepers, C. (2012). Determinants of structural choice in visually situated sentence production. Acta Psychologica, 141(3), 304–315.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Nappa, R. L., January, D., Gleitman, L. R., & Trueswell, J. (2004). Paying attention to attention: Perceptual priming effects on word order. In Proceedings of the 17th Annual CUNY Sentence Processing Conference.

    Google Scholar 

  • Norbury, C. F. (2011). Developmental language disorders: Overview. The SAGE Handbook of Developmental Disorders, p. 329.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nozari, N., & Dell, G. S. (2012). Feature migration in time: Reflection of selective attention on speech errors. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 38(4), 1084–1090.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Nozari, N., Dell, G. S., & Schwartz, M. F. (2011). Is comprehension necessary for error detection? A conflict-based account of monitoring in speech production. Cognitive Psychology, 63(1), 1–33.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Perrone-Bertolotti, M., Rapin, L., Lachaux, J. P., Baciu, M., & Loevenbruck, H. (2014). What is that little voice inside my head? Inner speech phenomenology, its role in cognitive performance, and its relation to self-monitoring. Behavioural Brain Research, 261, 220–239.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Piai, V., & Roelofs, A. (2013). Working memory capacity and dual-task interference in picture naming. Acta Psychologica, 142(3), 332–342.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Piai, V., Roelofs, A., & Schriefers, H. (2011). Semantic interference in immediate and delayed naming and reading: Attention and task decisions. Journal of Memory and Language, 64(4), 404–423.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Posner, M. I. (1980). Orienting of attention. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 32(1), 3–25.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Postma, A. (2000). Detection of errors during speech production: A review of speech monitoring models. Cognition, 77, 97–131.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Postma, A., & Oomen, C. C. E. (2005). Critical issues in speech monitoring. In R. J. Hartsuiker, R. Bastiaanse, A. Postma, & F. Wijnen (Eds.), Phonological encoding and monitoring in normal and pathological speech (pp. 157–166). Hove, New York: Psychology Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Price, C. J. (1998). The functional anatomy of word comprehension and production. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 2(8), 281–288.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Rapp, B., & Goldrick, M. (2000). Discreteness and interactivity in spoken word production. Psychological Review, 107(3), 460–499.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Rayner, K. (1998). Eye movements in reading and information processing: 20 years of research. Psychological Bulletin, 124(3), 372–422.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Riès, S., Janssen, N., Dufau, S., Alario, F. X., & Burle, B. (2011). General-purpose monitoring during speech production. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 23(6), 1419–1436.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Riley, K. G., & McGregor, K. K. (2012). Noise hampers children’s expressive word learning. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 43(3), 325–337.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Roelofs, A. (1997). The WEAVER model of word-form encoding in speech production. Cognition, 64(3), 249–284.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Roelofs, A. (2008). Tracing attention and the activation flow in spoken word planning using eye movements. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 34(2), 353.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Roelofs, A., Piai, V., & Schriefers, H. (2013). Context effects and selective attention in picture naming and word reading: Competition versus response exclusion. Language and Cognitive Processes, 28(5), 655–671.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Samuelson, L. K., & Smith, L. B. (2005). They call it like they see it: Spontaneous naming and attention to shape. Developmental Science, 8(2), 182–198.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Schnur, T. T., & Martin, R. (2012). Semantic picture–word interference is a postperceptual effect. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 19(2), 301–308.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scholl, B. J. (2001). Objects and attention: The state of the art. Cognition, 80(1), 1–46.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Schotter, E. R., Ferreira, V. S., & Rayner, K. (2013). Parallel object activation and attentional gating of information: Evidence from eye movements in the multiple object naming paradigm. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 39(2), 365.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Schotter, E. R., Jia, A., Ferreira, V. S., & Rayner, K. (2014). Preview benefit in speaking occurs regardless of preview timing. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 21(3), 755–762.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schriefers, H., Meyer, A. S., & Levelt, W. J. (1990). Exploring the time course of lexical access in language production: Picture-word interference studies. Journal of Memory and Language, 29(1), 86–102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shao, Z., Roelofs, A., & Meyer, A. S. (2012). Sources of individual differences in the speed of naming objects and actions: The contribution of executive control. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 65(10), 1927–1944.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Shao, Z., Meyer, A. S., & Roelofs, A. (2013). Selective and nonselective inhibition of competitors in picture naming. Memory & Cognition, 41(8), 1200–1211.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Singh, N., & Mishra, R. K. (2012). Does language proficiency modulate oculomotor control? Evidence from Hindi–English bilinguals. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 15(04), 771–781.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, L. B. (2013). It’s all connected: Pathways in visual object recognition and early noun learning. American Psychologist, 68(8), 618.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, L. B., Jones, S. S., & Landau, B. (1996). Naming in young children: A dumb attentional mechanism? Cognition, 60(2), 143–171.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, L. B., Jones, S. S., Landau, B., Gershkoff-Stowe, L., & Samuelson, L. (2002). Object name learning provides on-the-job training for attention. Psychological Science, 13(1), 13–19.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Steele, A., Karmiloff-Smith, A., Cornish, K., & Scerif, G. (2012). The multiple subfunctions of attention: Differential developmental gateways to literacy and numeracy. Child Development, 83(6), 2028–2041.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Strijkers, K., & Costa, A. (2011). Riding the lexical speedway: A critical review on the time course of lexical selection in speech production. Frontiers in Strijkers, K., Holcomb, P. J., & Costa, A. (2011). Conscious intention to speak proactively facilitates lexical access during overt object naming. Journal of Memory and Language, 65(4), 345–362.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thompson-Schill, S. L., D’Esposito, M., Aguirre, G. K., & Farah, M. J. (1997). Role of left inferior prefrontal cortex in retrieval of semantic knowledge: A reevaluation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 94(26), 14792–14797.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Tipper, S. P., Bourque, T. A., Anderson, S. H., & Brehaut, J. C. (1989). Mechanisms of attention: A developmental study. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 48(3), 353–378.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Tomlin, R. S. (1997). Mapping conceptual representations into linguistic representations: The role of attention in grammar. In Language and conceptualization, pp. 162–189.

    Google Scholar 

  • Traver, S. G., Hallahan, D. P., Kauffman, J. M., & Ball, D. M. (1976). Verbal rehearsal and selective attention in children with learning disabilities: A developmental lag. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 22, 375–385.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vigliocco, G., & Hartsuiker, R. J. (2002). The interplay of meaning, sound, and syntax in sentence production. Psychological Bulletin, 128(3), 442–472.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Vuilleumier, P., Schwartz, S., Duhous, S., et al. (2005). Selective attention modulates neural substrates of repetition priming and implicit visual memory: suppressions and enhancements revealed by fMRI. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 17, 1245–1260.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Cognitive Sciences, University of Hyderabad Centre for Neural and, Hyderabad, Andhra Pradesh, India

    Ramesh Kumar Mishra

Authors
  1. Ramesh Kumar Mishra
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ramesh Kumar Mishra .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer India

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Mishra, R.K. (2015). Attention in Speech. In: Interaction Between Attention and Language Systems in Humans. Springer, New Delhi. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-81-322-2592-8_5

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation