Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 11, 2026
05:48
Memorization-Based Training and Testing Paradigm for Robust Vocal Identity Recognition in Expressive Speech Using Event-Related Potentials Analysis
Published on: August 9, 2024
Electromyographic study of motor learning for a voice production task
Edwin M-L Yiu1, Katherine Verdolini, Linda P Y Chow
1Voice Research Laboratory, Division of Speech and Hearing Sciences, University of Hong Kong and Centre for Communication Disorders, Prince Philip Dental Hospital. eyiu@hku.hk
Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research : JSLHR
|February 16, 2006
Summary
Surface electromyographic (EMG) biofeedback did not improve targeted laryngeal muscle learning for voice production. However, it unexpectedly enhanced motor learning in untargeted orofacial muscles, suggesting attention plays a key role.
Area of Science:
- Motor learning
- Voice production
- Biofeedback
Background:
- Surface electromyography (EMG) biofeedback is used to train motor control.
- Its effectiveness in voice production, specifically for laryngeal muscles, requires further investigation.
- Understanding how biofeedback influences motor learning in different muscle groups is crucial.
Purpose of the Study:
- To assess the efficacy of surface EMG biofeedback for motor learning in voice production.
- To compare concurrent versus terminal biofeedback for a laryngeal muscle relaxation task during reading.
- To investigate the impact of biofeedback on targeted and non-targeted muscle activation.
Main Methods:
- Twenty-two healthy adults were divided into concurrent or terminal EMG biofeedback groups.
- Participants performed an oral reading task, instructed to minimize thyrohyoid muscle activation.
- EMG signals were recorded from laryngeal and orofacial sites; only laryngeal sites received feedback.
Main Results:
- Overall muscle activation decreased across phases, but not reliably in the targeted laryngeal muscles.
- No significant difference in learning was observed between concurrent and terminal biofeedback groups.
- Unexpectedly, significant decreases in muscle activation occurred in the non-feedback orofacial control sites.
Conclusions:
- EMG biofeedback for a target muscle group can incidentally enhance motor learning in adjacent, non-targeted muscles.
- Locus of attention may mediate this effect, with attention to muscular force potentially suppressing intentional learning but aiding incidental learning.
- Findings suggest a complex interplay between attention, feedback, and motor learning in different muscle systems.
