No AccessEditor's AwardAmerican Journal of Speech-Language PathologyTutorial1 Aug 2008

Principles of Motor Learning in Treatment of Motor Speech Disorders

    Purpose

    There has been renewed interest on the part of speech-language pathologists to understand how the motor system learns and determine whether principles of motor learning, derived from studies of nonspeech motor skills, apply to treatment of motor speech disorders. The purpose of this tutorial is to introduce principles that enhance motor learning for nonspeech motor skills and to examine the extent to which these principles apply in treatment of motor speech disorders.

    Method

    This tutorial critically reviews various principles in the context of nonspeech motor learning by reviewing selected literature from the major journals in motor learning. The potential application of these principles to speech motor learning is then discussed by reviewing relevant literature on treatment of speech disorders. Specific attention is paid to how these principles may be incorporated into treatment for motor speech disorders.

    Conclusions

    Evidence from nonspeech motor learning suggests that various principles may interact with each other and differentially affect diverse aspects of movements. Whereas few studies have directly examined these principles in speech motor (re)learning, available evidence suggests that these principles hold promise for treatment of motor speech disorders. Further research is necessary to determine which principles apply to speech motor (re)learning in impaired populations.

    References

    • Adams, S. G., & Page, A. D. (2000). Effects of selected practice and feedback variables on speech motor learning.Journal of Medical Speech-Language Pathology, 8, 215–220.
    • Adams, S. G., Page, A. D., & Jog, M. S. (2002). Summary feedback schedules and speech motor learning in Parkinson’s disease.Journal of Medical Speech-Language Pathology, 10, 215–220.
    • Aichert, I., & Ziegler, W. (2004). Syllable frequency and syllable structure in apraxia of speech.Brain and Language, 88, 148–159.
    • American Speech-Language-Hearing Association. (2005). Evidence-based practice in communication disorders [Position statement]. Available from www.asha.org/policy
    • Austermann Hula, S. N., Robin, D. A., Maas, E., Ballard, K. J., & Schmidt, R. A. (in press). Effects of feedback frequency and timing on acquisition and retention of speech skills in acquired apraxia of speech. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research.
    • Baddeley, A. D., & Longman, D. J. A. (1978). The influence of length and frequency of training session on the rate of learning to type.Ergonomics, 21, 627–635.
    • Ballard, K. J. (2001). Response generalization in apraxia of speech treatments: Taking another look.Journal of Communication Disorders, 34, 3–20.
    • Ballard, K. J., Granier, J., & Robin, D. A. (2000). Understanding the nature of apraxia of speech: Theory, analysis, and treatment.Aphasiology, 14, 969–995.
    • Ballard, K. J., Maas, E., & Robin, D. A. (2007). Treating control of voicing in apraxia of speech with variable practice.Aphasiology, 21, 1195–1217.
    • Ballard, K. J., & Robin, D. A. (2007). Influence of continual biofeedback on jaw pursuit tracking in healthy adults and adults with apraxia plus aphasia.Journal of Motor Behavior, 39, 19–28.
    • Ballard, K. J., & Thompson, C. K. (1999). Treatment and generalization of complex sentence production in agrammatism.Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 42, 690–707.
    • Basso, A. (2005). How intensive/prolonged should an intensive/prolonged treatment be?.Aphasiology, 19, 975–984.
    • Beilock, S. L., Bertenthal, B. I., McCoy, A. M., & Carr, T. H. (2004). Haste does not always make waste: Expertise, direction of attention, and speed versus accuracy in performing sensorimotor skills.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 11, 373–379.
    • Brydges, R., Carnahan, H., Backstein, D., & Dubrowski, A. (2007). Application of motor learning principles to complex surgical tasks: Searching for the optimal practice schedule.Journal of Motor Behavior, 39, 40–48.
    • Cattell, J. M. (1947). Aufmerksamkeit und reaction [Attention and reaction].In R. S. Woodworth (Ed.), Psychological research, 1(pp. 252–255). Lancaster, PA: Science Press(Original work published 1893).
    • Chamberlin, C. J., & Lee, T. D. (1993). Arranging practice conditions and designing instruction.In R. N. Singer, M. Murphey, & L. K. Tennant (Eds.), Handbook on research in sport psychology (pp. 213–241). New York: Macmillan.
    • Chiviacowsky, S., & Wulf, G. (2005). Self-controlled feedback is effective if it is based on the learner’s performance.Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 76, 42–48.
    • Cholin, J., Levelt, W. J. M., & Schiller, N. O. (2006). Effects of syllable frequency in speech production.Cognition, 99, 205–235.
    • Chumpelik, D. (1984). The PROMPT system of therapy: Theoretical framework and applications for developmental apraxia of speech.Seminars in Speech and Language, 5, 139–156.
    • Clark, H. M. (2003). Neuromuscular treatments for speech and swallowing: A tutorial.American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 12, 400–415.
    • Clark, H. M., & Robin, D. A. (1998). Generalised motor programme and parameterisation accuracy in apraxia of speech and conduction aphasia.Aphasiology, 12, 699–713.
    • Darley, F. L., Aronson, A. E., & Brown, J. R. (1975). Motor speech disorders. Philadelphia: W. B. Saunders.
    • Doyon, J., & Benali, H. (2005). Reorganization and plasticity in the adult brain during learning of motor skills.Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 15, 161–167.
    • Dromey, C., & Adams, S. (2000). Loudness perception and hypophonia in Parkinson disease.Journal of Medical Speech-Language Pathology, 8, 255–259.
    • Duffy, J. (2005). Motor speech disorders: Substrates, differential diagnosis, and management (2nd ed.). St. Louis, MO: Mosby-Yearbook.
    • Dunham, P., & Mueller, R. (1993). Effect of fading knowledge of results on acquisition, retention, and transfer of a simple motor task.Perceptual and Motor Skills, 77(3, Pt. 2), 1187–1192.
    • Fox, C. M., Morrison, C. E., Ramig, L. O., & Sapir, S. (2002). Current perspectives on the Lee Silverman Voice Treatment (LSVT) for individuals with idiopathic Parkinson disease.American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 11, 111–123.
    • Freedman, S. E., Maas, E., Caligiuri, M. P., Wulf, G., & Robin, D. A. (2007). Internal vs. external: Oral motor performance as a function of attentional focus.Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 50, 131–136.
    • Gierut, J. A. (2001). Complexity in phonological treatment: Clinical factors.Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 32, 229–241.
    • Gierut, J. A. (2007). Phonological complexity and language learnability.American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 16, 6–17.
    • Giuffrida, C. G., Shea, J. B., & Fairbrother, J. T. (2002). Differential transfer benefits of increased practice for constant, blocked, and serial practice schedules.Journal of Motor Behavior, 34, 353–365.
    • Guadagnoli, M. A., & Kohl, R. M. (2001). Knowledge of results for motor learning: Relationship between error estimation and knowledge of results frequency.Journal of Motor Behavior, 33, 217–224.
    • Guadagnoli, M. A., & Lee, T. D. (2004). Challenge point: A framework for conceptualizing the effects of various practice conditions in motor learning.Journal of Motor Behavior, 36, 212–224.
    • Guenther, F. H. (2006). Cortical interactions underlying the production of speech sounds.Journal of Communication Disorders, 39, 350–365.
    • Guenther, F. H., Ghosh, S. S., & Tourville, J. A. (2006). Neural modeling and imaging of the cortical interactions underlying syllable production.Brain and Language, 96, 280–301.
    • Guenther, F. H., Hampson, M., & Johnson, D. (1998). A theoretical investigation of reference frames for the planning of speech movements.Psychological Review, 105, 611–633.
    • Hanlon, R. E. (1996). Motor learning following unilateral stroke.Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 77, 811–815.
    • Hansen, S., Tremblay, L., & Elliott, D. (2005). Part and whole practice: Chunking and online control in the acquisition of a serial motor task.Journal of Motor Behavior, 76, 60–66.
    • Hodges, N. J., & Franks, I. M. (2001). Learning a coordination skill: Interactive effects of instruction and feedback.Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 72, 132–142.
    • Janelle, C. M., Barba, D. A., Frehlich, S. G., Tennant, L. K., & Cauraugh, J. H. (1997). Maximizing performance effectiveness through videotape replay and a self-controlled learning environment.Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 68, 269–279.
    • Johansen-Berg, H., Dawes, H., Guy, C., Smith, S. M., Wade, D. T., & Matthews, P. M. (2002). Correlation between motor improvements and altered fMRI activity after rehabilitative therapy.Brain, 125, 2731–2742.
    • Keele, S. W. (1968). Movement control in skilled motor performance.Psychological Bulletin, 70, 387–403.
    • Keetch, K. M., Schmidt, R. A., Lee, T. D., & Young, D. E. (2005). Especial skills: Their emergence with massive amounts of practice.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 31, 970–978.
    • Kelso, J. A. S. (1995). Dynamic patterns: The self-organization of brain and behavior. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
    • Kelso, J. A. S., Saltzman, E. L., & Tuller, B. (1986). The dynamical perspective on speech production: Data and theory.Journal of Phonetics, 14, 29–59.
    • Kent, R. D. (1996). Hearing and believing: Some limits to the auditory-perceptual assessment of speech and voice disorders.American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 5, 7–23.
    • Kent, R., & Rosenbek, J. (1983). Acoustic patterns of apraxia of speech.Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 26, 231–249.
    • Kiran, S. (2007). Complexity in the treatment of naming deficits.American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 16, 18–29.
    • Kiran, S., & Thompson, C. K. (2003). The role of semantic complexity in treatment of naming deficits: Training semantic categories in fluent aphasia by controlling exemplar typicality.Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 46, 773–787.
    • Klapp, S. T. (1995). Motor response programming during simple and choice reaction time: The role of practice.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 21, 1015–1027.
    • Knock, T., Ballard, K. J., Robin, D. A., & Schmidt, R. A. (2000). Influence of order of stimulus presentation on speech motor learning: A principled approach to treatment for apraxia of speech.Aphasiology, 14, 653–668.
    • Krakauer, J. W. (2006). Motor learning: Its relevance to stroke recovery and neurorehabilitation.Current Opinion in Neurology, 19, 84–90.
    • Lai, Q., & Shea, C. H. (1998). Generalized motor program (GMP) learning: Effects of reduced frequency of knowledge of results and practice variability.Journal of Motor Behavior, 30, 51–59.
    • Lai, Q., Shea, C. H., Bruechert, L., & Little, M. (2002). Auditory model enhances relative-timing learning.Journal of Motor Behavior, 34, 299–307.
    • Lai, Q., Shea, C. H., Wulf, G., & Wright, D. L. (2000). Optimizing generalized motor program and parameter learning.Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 71, 10–24.
    • Landers, M., Wulf, G., Wallmann, H., & Guadagnoli, M. (2005). An external focus of attention attenuates balance impairment in patients with Parkinson’s disease who have a fall history.Physiotherapy, 91, 152–158.
    • Lee, T. D., & Genovese, E. D. (1989). Distribution of practice in motor skill acquisition: Different effects for discrete and continuous tasks.Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 60, 59–65.
    • Lee, T. D., & Magill, R. A. (1983). The locus of contextual interference in motor-skill acquisition.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 9, 730–746.
    • Lee, T. D., & Magill, R. A. (1985). Can forgetting facilitate skill acquisition?.D. Goodman, R. B. Wilberg, & I. M. Franks (Eds.), Differing perspectives in motor learning, memory, and control (pp. 3–22). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
    • Lee, T. D., Magill, R. A., & Weeks, D. J. (1985). Influence of practice schedule on testing schema theory predictions in adults.Journal of Motor Behavior, 17, 283–299.
    • Lersten, K. C. (1968). Transfer of movement components in a motor learning task.Research Quarterly, 39, 575–581.
    • Levelt, W. J. M., Roelofs, A., & Meyer, A. S. (1999). A theory of lexical access in speech production.Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 22, 1–38.
    • Liotti, M., Ramig, L. O., Vogel, D., New, P., Cook, C. I., & Ingham, R. J. (2003). Hypophonia in Parkinson’s disease: Neural correlates of voice treatment revealed by PET.Neurology, 60, 432–440.
    • Maas, E., Barlow, J., Robin, D., & Shapiro, L. (2002). Treatment of sound errors in aphasia and apraxia of speech: Effects of phonological complexity.Aphasiology, 16, 609–622.
    • Mané, A. M., Adams, J. A., & Donchin, E. (1989). Adaptive and part-whole training in the acquisition of a complex perceptual-motor skill.Acta Psychologica, 71, 179–196.
    • McNeil, M. R., Doyle, P. J., & Wambaugh, J. L. (2000). Apraxia of speech: A treatable disorder of motor planning and programming.In S. E. Nadeau, L. J. Gonzalez-Rothi, & B. Crosson (Eds.), Aphasia and language: Theory to practice (pp. 221–266). New York: Guilford Press.
    • McNeil, M. R., Robin, D. A., & Schmidt, R. A. (1997). Apraxia of speech: Definition, differentiation, and treatment.In M. R. McNeil (Ed.), Clinical management of sensorimotor speech disorders (pp. 311–344). New York: Thieme.
    • Morrisette, M. L., & Gierut, J. A. (2003). Unified treatment recommendations: A response to Rvachew and Nowak (2001).Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 46, 382–385.
    • Newell, K. M., Carlton, M. J., & Antoniou, A. (1990). The interaction of criterion and feedback information in learning a drawing task.Journal of Motor Behavior, 22, 536–552.
    • Newell, K. M., Carlton, M. J., Fisher, A. T., & Rutter, B. G. (1989). Whole-part training strategies for learning the response dynamics of microprocessor driven simulators.Acta Psychologica, 71, 197–216.
    • Nicholson, D. E., & Schmidt, R. A. (1991). Scheduling information feedback to enhance training effectiveness.In Proceedings of the Human Factors Society 35th Annual Meeting (pp. 1400–1403). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors Society.
    • Nudo, R. J., Wise, B. M., SiFuentes, F., & Milliken, G. W. (1996). Neural substrates for the effects of rehabilitative training on motor recovery after ischemic infarct.Science, 272, 1791–1794.
    • Osu, R., Hirai, S., Yoshioka, T., & Kawato, M. (2004). Random presentation enables subjects to adapt to two opposing forces on the hand.Nature Neuroscience, 7, 111–112.
    • Park, J. H., & Shea, C. H. (2003). Effect of practice on effector independence.Journal of Motor Behavior, 35, 33–40.
    • Park, J. H., & Shea, C. H. (2005). Sequence learning: Response structure and effector transfer.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 58A, 387–419.
    • Park, J. H., Shea, C. H., & Wright, D. L. (2000). Reduced–frequency concurrent and terminal feedback: A test of the guidance hypothesis.Journal of Motor Behavior, 32, 287–296.
    • Park, J. H., Wilde, H., & Shea, C. H. (2004). Part-whole practice of movement sequences.Journal of Motor Behavior, 36, 51–61.
    • Perkell, J. S., Guenther, F. H., Lane, H., Matthies, M. L., Perrier, P., & Vick, J. (2000). A theory of speech motor control and supporting data from speakers with normal hearing and with profound hearing loss.Journal of Phonetics, 28, 233–372.
    • Pigott, R. E., & Shapiro, D. C. (1984). Motor schema: The structure of the variability session.Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 55, 41–45.
    • Ramig, L. O., Countryman, S., Thompson, L. L., & Horii, Y. (1995). Comparison of two intensive speech treatments for Parkinson disease.Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 38, 1232–1251.
    • Ramig, L. O., Sapir, S., Countryman, S., Pawlas, A. A., O’Brien, C., Hoehn, M., & Thompson, L. L. (2001). Intensive voice treatment (LSVT®) for patients with Parkinson’s disease: A 2 year follow-up.Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery, and Psychiatry, 71, 493–498.
    • Ramig, L. O., Sapir, S., Fox, C., & Countryman, S. (2001). Changes in vocal loudness following intensive voice treatment (LSVT®) in individuals with Parkinson’s disease: A comparison with untreated patients and normal age-matched controls.Movement Disorders, 16, 79–83.
    • Rhodes, B. J., Bullock, D., Verwey, W. B., Averbeck, B. B., & Page, M. P. A. (2004). Learning and production of movement sequences: Behavioral, neurophysiological, and modeling perspectives.Human Movement Science, 23, 699–746.
    • Rijntjes, M., & Weiller, C. (2002). Recovery of motor and language abilities after stroke: The contribution of functional imaging.Progress in Neurobiology, 66, 109–122.
    • Robertson, E. M., Pascual-Leone, A., & Miall, R. C. (2004). Current concepts in procedural consolidation.Nature Neuroscience Reviews, 5, 1–7.
    • Robey, R. R. (1998). A meta-analysis of clinical outcomes in the treatment of aphasia.Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 41, 172–187.
    • Robin, D. A., Maas, E., Sandberg, Y., & Schmidt, R. A. (2007). Motor control and learning and childhood apraxia of speech.In P. K. Hall, L. S. Jordan, & D. A. Robin (Eds.), Developmental apraxia of speech: Theory and clinical practice (2nd ed.). Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.
    • Rose, M., & Douglas, J. (2006). A comparison of verbal and gesture treatments for a word production deficit resulting from acquired apraxia of speech.Aphasiology, 20, 1186–1209.
    • Rosenbek, J. C., Lemme, M. L., Ahern, M. B., Harris, E. H., & Wertz, R. T. (1973). A treatment for apraxia of speech in adults.Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 38, 462–472.
    • Rvachew, S., & Nowak, M. (2001). The effect of target-selection strategy on phonological learning.Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 44, 610–623.
    • Rvachew, S., & Nowak, M. (2003). Clinical outcomes as a function of target selection strategy: A response to Morrisette and Gierut.Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 46, 386–389.
    • Sakai, K., Hikosaka, O., & Nakamura, K. (2004). Emergence of rhythm during motor learning.Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 18, 547–553.
    • Salmoni, A. W., Schmidt, R. A., & Walter, C. B. (1984). Knowledge of results and motor learning: A review and critical reappraisal.Psychological Bulletin, 95, 355–386.
    • Schmidt, R. A. (1972). The case against learning and forgetting scores.Journal of Motor Behavior, 4, 79–88.
    • Schmidt, R. A. (1975). A schema theory of discrete motor skill learning.Psychological Review, 82, 225–260.
    • Schmidt, R. A. (1991). Frequent augmented feedback can degrade learning: Evidence and interpretations.In J. Requin, & G. E. Stelmach (Eds.), Tutorials in motor neuroscience (pp. 59–75). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
    • Schmidt, R. A. (2003). Motor schema theory after 27 years: Reflections and implications for a new theory.Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 74, 366–375.
    • Schmidt, R. A., & Bjork, R. A. (1992). New conceptualizations of practice: Common principles in three paradigms suggest new concepts for training.Psychological Science, 3, 207–217.
    • Schmidt, R. A., & Lee, T. D. (2005). Motor control and learning: A behavioral emphasis (4th ed.). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
    • Schmidt, R. A., & Wulf, G. (1997). Continuous concurrent feedback degrades skill learning: Implications for training and simulation.Human Factors, 39, 509–525.
    • Schneider, S. L., & Frens, R. A. (2005). Training four-syllable CV patterns in individuals with acquired apraxia of speech: Theoretical implications.Aphasiology, 19, 451–471.
    • Schulz, G. M., Dingwall, W. O., & Ludlow, C. L. (1999). Speech and oral motor learning in individuals with cerebellar atrophy.Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 42, 1157–1175.
    • Schulz, G. M., Sulc, S., Leon, S., & Gilligan, G. (2000). Speech motor learning in Parkinson disease.Journal of Medical Speech-Language Pathology, 8, 243–247.
    • Sekiya, H., Magill, R. A., Sidaway, B., & Anderson, D. I. (1994). The contextual interference effect for skill variations from the same and different generalized motor programs.Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 65, 330–338.
    • Shapiro, D. C., & Schmidt, R. A. (1982). The schema theory: Recent evidence and developmental implications.In J. A. S. Kelso, & J. E. Clark (Eds.), The development of movement control and co-ordination (pp. 113–150). New York: Wiley.
    • Shea, C. H., & Kohl, R. M. (1991). Composition of practice: Influence on the retention of motor skills.Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 62, 187–195.
    • Shea, C. H., Kohl, R. M., & Indermill, C. (1990). Contextual interference: Contributions of practice.Acta Psychologica, 73, 145–157.
    • Shea, C. H., Lai, Q., Black, C., & Park, J. H. (2000). Spacing practice sessions across days benefits the learning of motor skills.Human Movement Science, 19, 737–760.
    • Shea, C. H., Lai, Q., Wright, D. L., Immink, M., & Black, C. (2001). Consistent and variable practice conditions: Effects on relative and absolute timing.Journal of Motor Behavior, 33, 139–152.
    • Shea, C. H., & Wulf, G. (1999). Enhancing motor learning through external-focus instructions and feedback.Human Movement Science, 18, 553–571.
    • Shea, C. H., & Wulf, G. (2005). Schema theory: A critical appraisal and reevaluation.Journal of Motor Behavior, 37, 85–101.
    • Shea, C. H., Wulf, G., Park, J. H., & Gaunt, B. (2001). Effects of an auditory model on the learning of relative and absolute timing.Journal of Motor Behavior, 33, 127–138.
    • Shea, J. B., & Morgan, R. L. (1979). Contextual interference effects on the acquisition, retention, and transfer of a motor skill.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning & Memory, 5, 179–187.
    • Shriberg, L. D., Campbell, T. F., Karlsson, H. B., Brown, R. L., McSweeney, J. L., & Nadler, C. J. (2003). A diagnostic marker for childhood apraxia of speech: The lexical stress ratio.Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics, 17, 549–574.
    • Spencer, K. A., & Rogers, M. A. (2005). Speech motor programming in hypokinetic and ataxic dysarthria.Brain and Language, 94, 347–366.
    • Spielman, J., Ramig, L. O., Mahler, L., Halpern, A., & Gavin, W. J. (2007). Effects of an extended version of the Lee Silverman Voice Treatment on voice and speech in Parkinson’s disease.American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 16, 95–107.
    • Steinhauer, K., & Grayhack, J. P. (2000). The role of knowledge of results in performance and learning of a voice motor task.Journal of Voice, 14, 137–145.
    • Strand, E. A., & Debertine, P. (2000). The efficacy of integral stimulation intervention with developmental apraxia of speech.Journal of Medical Speech-Language Pathology, 8, 295–300.
    • Swinnen, S. P. (1996). Information feedback for motor skill learning: A review.In H. N. Zelaznik (Ed.), Advances in motor learning and control (pp. 37–66). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
    • Swinnen, S. P., Lee, T. D., Verschueren, S., Serrien, D. J., & Bogaerds, H. (1997). Interlimb coordination: Learning and transfer under different feedback conditions.Human Movement Science, 16, 749–785.
    • Swinnen, S., Schmidt, R. A., Nicholson, D. E., & Shapiro, D. C. (1990). Information feedback for skill acquisition: Instantaneous knowledge of results degrades learning.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 16, 706–716.
    • Swinnen, S., Walter, C. B., Lee, T. D., & Serrien, D. J. (1993). Acquiring bimanual skills: Contrasting forms of information feedback for interlimb decoupling.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 19, 1328–1344.
    • Thompson, C. K. (2007). Complexity in language learning and treatment.American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 16, 3–5.
    • Thompson, C. K., Ballard, K. J., & Shapiro, L. P. (1998). The role of syntactic complexity in training wh-movement structures in agrammatic aphasia: Optimal order for promoting generalization.Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, 4, 661–674.
    • Thompson, C. K., & Shapiro, L. P. (2007). Complexity in treatment of syntactic deficits.American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 16, 30–42.
    • Thompson, C. K., Shapiro, L. P., Kiran, S., & Sobecks, J. (2003). The role of syntactic complexity in treatment of sentence deficits in agrammatic aphasia: The complexity account of treatment efficacy (CATE).Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 46, 591–607.
    • Tjaden, K. (2000). Exploration of a treatment technique for prosodic disturbance following stroke.Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics, 14, 619–641.
    • Vance, J., Wulf, G., McNevin, N., Töllner, T., & Mercer, J. (2004). EMG activity as a function of the performer’s focus of attention.Journal of Motor Behavior, 36, 450–459.
    • Vander Linden, D. W., Cauraugh, J. H., & Greene, T. A. (1993). The effect of frequency of kinetic feedback on learning an isometric force production task in nondisabled subjects.Physical Therapy, 73, 79–87.
    • Van Riper, C., & Irwin, J. (1958). Voice and articulation. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
    • Van Rossum, J. H. A. (1990). Schmidt’s schema theory: The empirical base of the variability of practice hypothesis. A critical analysis.Human Movement Science, 9, 387–435.
    • Van Vliet, P., & Wulf, G. (2006). Extrinsic feedback for motor learning after stroke: What is the evidence?.Disability and Rehabilitation, 28, 831–840.
    • Varley, R., Whiteside, S., Windsor, F., & Fisher, H. (2006). Moving up from the segment: A comment on Aichert and Ziegler’s syllable frequency and syllable structure in apraxia of speech, Brain and Language, 88, 148–159, 2004.Brain and Language, 96, 235–239.
    • Wambaugh, J. L., Doyle, P. J., West, J. E., & Kalinyak, M. M. (1995). Spectral analysis of sound errors in persons with apraxia of speech and aphasia.American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 4, 186–192.
    • Wambaugh, J. L., Duffy, J. R., McNeil, M. R., Robin, D. A., & Rogers, M. A. (2006). Treatment guidelines for acquired apraxia of speech: A synthesis and evaluation of the evidence.Journal of Medical Speech-Language Pathology, 14(2)xv–xxxiii.
    • Wambaugh, J. L., Kalinyak-Fliszar, M. M., West, J. E., & Doyle, P. J. (1998). Effects of treatment for sound errors in apraxia of speech and aphasia.Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 41, 725–743.
    • Wambaugh, J. L., Martinez, A. L., McNeil, M. R., & Rogers, M. A. (1999). Sound production treatment for apraxia of speech: Overgeneralization and maintenance effects.Aphasiology, 13, 821–837.
    • Wambaugh, J. L., & Nessler, C. (2004). Modification of sound production treatment for apraxia of speech: Acquisition and generalization effects.Aphasiology, 18, 407–427.
    • Wambaugh, J. L., Nessler, C., Bennett, J., & Mauszycki, S. C. (2004). Variability in apraxia of speech: A perceptual and VOT analysis of stop consonants.Journal of Medical Speech-Language Pathology, 12, 221–227.
    • Winstein, C. J., & Schmidt, R. A. (1990). Reduced frequency of knowledge of results enhances motor skill learning.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 16, 677–691.
    • Wishart, L. R., & Lee, T. D. (1997). Effects of aging and reduced relative frequency of knowledge of results on learning a motor skill.Perceptual and Motor Skills, 84(3, Pt. 1), 1107–1122.
    • Wright, D. L., Black, C. B., Immink, M. A., Brueckner, S., & Magnuson, C. (2004). Long-term motor programming improvements occur via concatenating movement sequences during random but not blocked practice.Journal of Motor Behavior, 36, 39–50.
    • Wright, D. L., & Shea, C. H. (2001). Manipulating generalized motor program difficulty during blocked and random practice does not affect parameter learning.Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 72, 32–38.
    • Wulf, G. (2007). Attention and motor skill learning. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
    • Wulf, G., Höβ, M., & Prinz, W. (1998). Instructions for motor learning: Differential effects of internal versus external focus of attention.Journal of Motor Behavior, 30, 169–179.
    • Wulf, G., Lauterbach, B., & Toole, T. (1999). Learning advantages of an external focus of attention in golf.Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 70, 120–126.
    • Wulf, G., & Lee, T. D. (1993). Contextual interference in movements of the same class: Differential effects on program and parameter learning.Journal of Motor Behavior, 25, 254–263.
    • Wulf, G., Lee, T. D., & Schmidt, R. A. (1994). Reducing knowledge of results about relative versus absolute timing: Differential effects on learning.Journal of Motor Behavior, 26, 362–369.
    • Wulf, G., McConnel, N., Gärtner, M., & Schwarz, A. (2002). Enhancing the learning of sport skills through external-focus feedback.Journal of Motor Behavior, 34, 171–182.
    • Wulf, G., & McNevin, N. (2003). Simply distracting learners is not enough: More evidence for the learning benefits of an external focus of attention.European Journal of Sport Science, 3(5)1–13.
    • Wulf, G., McNevin, N., & Shea, C. H. (2001). The automacity of complex motor skill learning as a function of attentional focus.The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 54A, 1143–1154.
    • Wulf, G., & Prinz, W. (2001). Directing attention to movement effects enhances learning: A review.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 8, 648–660.
    • Wulf, G., & Schmidt, R. A. (1989). The learning of generalized motor programs: Reducing the relative frequency of knowledge of results enhances memory.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 15, 748–757.
    • Wulf, G., & Schmidt, R. A. (1997). Variability of practice and implicit motor learning.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 23, 987–1006.
    • Wulf, G., Schmidt, R. A., & Deubel, H. (1993). Reduced frequency feedback enhances generalized motor program learning but not parameterization learning.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 19, 1134–1150.
    • Wulf, G., & Shea, C. H. (2002). Principles derived from the study of simple motor skills do not generalize to complex skill learning.Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 9, 185–211.
    • Wulf, G., & Shea, C. H. (2004). Understanding the role of augmented feedback: The good, the bad, and the ugly.In A. M. Williams, & N. J. Hodges (Eds.), Skill acquisition in sport: Research, theory and practice (pp. 121–144). London: Routledge.
    • Yorkston, K. M., Beukelman, D. R., Strand, E., & Bell, K. R. (1999). Clinical management of motor speech disorders in children and adults. Boston: Little Brown.

    Additional Resources