Purpose: The present study which addressed adults who stutter (AWS) attempted to investigate power spectral dynamics in the stuttering state by answering the questions using quantitative electroencephalography (qEEG). Method: A 64-channel electroencephalography (EEG) setup was used for data acquisition at 20 AWS. Since the speech, especially stuttering, causes significant noise in the EEG, 2 conditions of speech preparation (SP) and imagined speech (IS) were considered. EEG signals were decomposed into 6 bands. The corresponding sources were localized using the standard low-resolution electromagnetic tomography (sLORETA) tool in both fluent and dysfluent states. Results: Significant differences were noted after analyzing the time-locked EEG signals in fluent and dysfluent utterances. Consistent with previous studies, poor alpha and beta suppression in SP and IS conditions were localized in the left frontotemporal areas in a dysfluent state. This was partly true for the right frontal regions. In the theta range, disfluency was concurrence with increased activation in the left and right motor areas. Increased delta power in the left and right motor areas as well as increased beta2 power over left parietal regions was notable EEG features upon fluent speech. Conclusion: Based on the present findings and those of earlier studies, explaining the neural circuitries involved in stuttering probably requires an examination of the entire frequency spectrum involved in speech.
SmithAWeberC. Childhood stuttering: Where are we and where are we going?Semin Speech Lang. 2016;37(4):291‐297. doi:10.1055/s-0036-1587703
2.
YairiEAmbroseNG. Early childhood stuttering I: Persistency and recovery rates. J Speech Lang Hear Res.1999;42(5):1097‐1112. doi:10.1044/jslhr.4205.1097
3.
EtchellAC, Civier O, Ballard KJ, Sowman PF. A systematic literature review of neuroimaging research on developmental stuttering between 1995 and 2016. J Fluen Disord.2017;(55):6-45.
4.
JiangJ, Lu C, Peng D, Zhu C, Howell P. Classification of types of stuttering symptoms based on brain activity. PLOS ONE. 2012;7(6):e39747. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0039747
5.
CraigABlumgartETranY. The impact of stuttering on the quality of life in adults who stutter. J Fluency Disord. 2009;34(2):61‐71. doi:10.1016/j.jfludis.2009.05.002
6.
YarussJS. Assessing quality of life in stuttering treatment outcomes research. J Fluency Disord. 2010;35(3):190‐202. doi:10.1016/j.jfludis.2010.05.010
7.
BelykMKraftSJBrownS. Stuttering as a trait or state - an ALE meta-analysis of neuroimaging studies. Eur J Neurosci. 2015;41(2):275‐284. doi:10.1111/ejn.12765
8.
JoosK, De Ridder D, Boey RA, Vanneste S. Functional connectivity changes in adults with developmental stuttering: A preliminary study using quantitative electro-encephalography. Front Hum Neurosci.2014;8:783. doi:10.3389/fnhum.2014.00783
9.
SaltuklarogluT, Harkrider AW, Thornton D, Jenson D, Kittilstved T. EEG Mu (micro) rhythm spectra and oscillatory activity differentiate stuttering from non-stuttering adults. Neuroimage. 2017;153:232‐245. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2017.04.022
10.
AlmPA. Stuttering: A disorder of energy supply to neurons?Front Hum Neurosci.2021;15:289.
11.
WuJC, et al.Increased dopamine activity associated with stuttering. Neuroreport. 1997;8(3):767‐770. doi:10.1097/00001756-199702100-00037
12.
AlmPA. Stuttering and the basal ganglia circuits: A critical review of possible relations. J Commun Disord. 2004;37(4):325‐369. doi:10.1016/j.jcomdis.2004.03.001
13.
ChangS-EGuentherFH. Involvement of the cortico-basal ganglia-thalamocortical loop in developmental stuttering. Front Psychol.2020;10:3088.
14.
BusanP, et al.Stuttering as a matter of delay in neural activation: A combined TMS/EEG study. Clin Neurophysiol.2019;130(1):61‐76. doi:10.1016/j.clinph.2018.10.005
15.
BowersA, Saltuklaroglu T, Jenson D, Harkrider A, Thornton D. Power and phase coherence in sensorimotor mu and temporal lobe alpha components during covert and overt syllable production. Exp Brain Res.2019;237(3):705‐721. doi:10.1007/s00221-018-5447-4
16.
GehrigJ, Wibral M, Arnold C, Kell C. Setting up the speech production network: How oscillations contribute to lateralized information routing. Front Psychol.2012;3:169.
17.
JensonD, Bowers AL, Hudock D, Saltuklaroglu T. The application of EEG mu rhythm measures to neurophysiological research in stuttering. Front Hum Neurosci.2020;13:458.
18.
JensonD, Bowers AL, Harkrider AW, Thornton D, Cuellar M, Saltuklaroglu T. Temporal dynamics of sensorimotor integration in speech perception and production: Independent component analysis of EEG data. Front Psychol.2014;5:656.
19.
EtchellACJohnsonBWSowmanPF. Beta oscillations, timing, and stuttering. Front Hum Neurosci.2014;8:467. doi:10.3389/fnhum.2014.00467
20.
NingN, Peng D, Liu X, Yang S. Speech timing deficit of stuttering: Evidence from contingent negative variations. PLOS ONE. 2017;12(1):e0168836. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0168836
MersovA-M, Jobst C, Cheyne DO, De Nil L. Sensorimotor oscillations prior to speech onset reflect altered motor networks in adults who stutter. Front Hum Neurosci.2016;10:443.
23.
SalmelinR, Schnitzler A, Schmitz F, Freund HJ. Single word reading in developmental stutterers and fluent speakers. Brain. 2000;123(6):1184‐1202. doi:10.1093/brain/123.6.1184
24.
OzgeATorosFComelekogluU. The role of hemispheral asymmetry and regional activity of quantitative EEG in children with stuttering. Child Psychiatry Hum Dev. 2003;34(4):269‐280. doi:10.1023/B:CHUD.0000020679.15106.a4
25.
SenguptaR, Shah S, Loucks TM, et al.Cortical dynamics of disfluency in adults who stutter. Physiol Rep. 2017;5(9):e13194. doi:10.14814/phy2.13194
26.
VanhoutteS, Vanhoutte S, Cosyns M, et al.When will a stuttering moment occur? The determining role of speech motor preparation. Neuropsychologia. 2016;86:93‐102. doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2016.04.018
27.
MersovA-M, Cheyne D, Jobst C, De Nil L. A preliminary study on the neural oscillatory characteristics of motor preparation prior to dysfluent and fluent utterances in adults who stutter. J Fluen Disord.2018;55:145‐155. doi:10.1016/j.jfludis.2017.05.003
28.
KorzeczekA, Neef NE, Steinmann I, Paulus W, Sommer M. Stuttering severity relates to frontotemporal low-beta synchronization during pre-speech preparation. Clin Neurophysiol.2022;138:84‐96. doi:10.1016/j.clinph.2022.03.010
29.
InghamRJ, Fox PT, Costello Ingham J, Zamarripa F. Is overt stuttered speech a prerequisite for the neural activations associated with chronic developmental stuttering?Brain Lang.2000;75(2):163‐194. doi:10.1006/brln.2000.2351
30.
WymbsNF, Ingham RJ, Ingham JC, Paolini KE, Grafton ST. Individual differences in neural regions functionally related to real and imagined stuttering. Brain Lang.2013;124(2):153‐164. doi:10.1016/j.bandl.2012.11.013
31.
TianXPoeppelD. Mental imagery of speech and movement implicates the dynamics of internal forward models. Front Psychol.2010;1:166.
32.
TianXPoeppelD. Mental imagery of speech: Linking motor and perceptual systems through internal simulation and estimation. Front Hum Neurosci.2012;6:314. doi:10.3389/fnhum.2012.00314
33.
JensonD, Reilly KJ, Harkrider AW, Thornton D, Saltuklaroglu T. Trait related sensorimotor deficits in people who stutter: An EEG investigation of μ rhythm dynamics during spontaneous fluency. Neuroimage Clin.2018;19:690‐702. doi:10.1016/j.nicl.2018.05.026
34.
Pascual-MarquiRDMichelCMLehmannD. Low resolution electromagnetic tomography: A new method for localizing electrical activity in the brain. Int J Psychophysiol. 1994;18(1):49‐65. doi:10.1016/0167-8760(84)90014-X
LiottiM, Ingham JC, Takai O, Paskos DK, Perez R, Ingham RJ. Spatiotemporal dynamics of speech sound perception in chronic developmental stuttering. Brain Lang.2010;115(2):141‐147. doi:10.1016/j.bandl.2010.07.007
37.
GhaderiAHAndevariMNSowmanPF. Evidence for a resting state network abnormality in adults who stutter. Front Integr Neurosci.2018;12(16).
38.
OldfieldRC. The assessment and analysis of handedness: The Edinburgh inventory. Neuropsychologia. 1971;9(1):97‐113. doi:10.1016/0028-3932(71)90067-4
39.
TahmasebiN, Shafie B, Karimi H, Mazaheri M. A Persian-version of the stuttering severity instrument-version four (SSI-4): How the new additions to SSI-4 complement its stuttering severity score?J Commun Disord.2018;74:1‐9. doi:10.1016/j.jcomdis.2018.04.005
40.
DelormeAMakeigS. EEGLAB: An open source toolbox for analysis of single-trial EEG dynamics including independent component analysis. J Neurosci Methods.2004;134(1):9‐21. doi:10.1016/j.jneumeth.2003.10.009
41.
BellAJSejnowskiTJ. An information-maximization approach to blind separation and blind deconvolution. Neural Comput.1995;7(6):1129‐1159. doi:10.1162/neco.1995.7.6.1129
42.
OlbrichS, Jödicke J, Sander C, Himmerich H, Hegerl U. ICA-based muscle artefact correction of EEG data: What is muscle and what is brain?: Comment on McMenamin et al. Neuroimage. 2011;54(1):1‐3. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2010.04.256
43.
MognonA, Jovicich J, Bruzzone L, Buiatti M. ADJUST: An automatic EEG artifact detector based on the joint use of spatial and temporal features. Psychophysiology. 2011;48(11):1597-604. doi:10.1111/j.1469-8986.2010.01061.x
44.
IalongoC. Understanding the effect size and its measures. Biochem Med (Zagreb).2016;26(2):150‐163. doi:10.11613/BM.2016.015
45.
FritzCOMorrisPERichlerJJ. Effect size estimates: Current use, calculations, and interpretation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General. 2012;141(1):2‐18. doi:10.1037/a0024338
46.
CohenJ. The effect size index: d. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. 1988;2(1):77-83.
47.
SawilowskySS. New effect size rules of thumb. J Mod Appl Stat Methods.2009;8(2):597‐599. doi:10.22237/jmasm/1257035100
48.
WellsBGMooreWH. EEG Alpha asymmetries in stutterers and non-stutterers: Effects of linguistic variables on hemispheric processing and fluency. Neuropsychologia. 1990;28(12):1295‐1305. doi:10.1016/0028-3932(90)90045-P
49.
GehrigJWibralMKellCA. Left-lateralization of speech production is indexed by the amplitude of preparatory alpha desynchronization. Klinische Neurophysiologie. 2012;43:P035. doi:10.1055/s-0032-1301585
50.
BoucherVJGilbertACJemelB. The role of low-frequency neural oscillations in speech processing: Revisiting Delta entrainment. J Cogn Neurosci.2019;31:(8):1205-1215. doi:10.1162/jocn_a_01410
51.
BehroozmandR, Ibrahim N, Korzyukov O, Robin DA, Larson CR. Functional role of delta and theta band oscillations for auditory feedback processing during vocal pitch motor control. Front Neurosci.2015;9:109.
52.
CaiS, Beal DS, Ghosh SS, Tiede MK, Guenther FH, Perkell JS. Weak responses to auditory feedback perturbation during articulation in persons who stutter: Evidence for abnormal auditory-motor transformation. PloS one. 2012;7(7):e41830. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0041830
53.
LoucksTChonHHanW. Audiovocal integration in adults who stutter. Int J Lang Commun Disord.2012;47(4):451‐456. doi:10.1111/j.1460-6984.2011.00111.x
54.
DaliriAMaxL. Modulation of auditory processing during speech movement planning is limited in adults who stutter. Brain Lang.2015;143:59‐68. doi:10.1016/j.bandl.2015.03.002
55.
GiraudA-L, Kleinschmidt A, Poeppel D, Lund TE, Frackowiak RSJ, Laufs H. Endogenous cortical rhythms determine cerebral specialization for speech perception and production. Neuron. 2007;56(6):1127‐1134. doi:10.1016/j.neuron.2007.09.038
56.
CavanaghJFFrankMJ. Frontal theta as a mechanism for cognitive control. Trends Cogn Sci.2014;18(8):414‐421. doi:10.1016/j.tics.2014.04.012
57.
OkudaJ, et al.Differential involvement of regions of rostral prefrontal cortex (Brodmann area 10) in time-and event-based prospective memory. Int J Psychophysiol.2007;64(3):233‐246. doi:10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2006.09.009
58.
MillerEKCohenJD. An integrative theory of prefrontal cortex function. Annu Rev Neurosci.2001;24(1):167‐202. doi:10.1146/annurev.neuro.24.1.167
59.
SchmitzTWKawahara-BaccusTNJohnsonSC. Metacognitive evaluation, self-relevance, and the right prefrontal cortex. NeuroImage. 2004;22(2):941‐947. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2004.02.018
