Test-Retest Reliability of Behavioral Assays of Feedforward and Feedback Auditory-Motor Control of Voice and Articulation

Behavioral assays of feedforward and feedback auditory-motor control of voice and articulation frequently are used to make inferences about underlying neural mechanisms and to study speech development and disorders. However, no studies have examined the test-retest reliability of such measures, which is critical for rigorous study of auditory-motor control. Thus, the purpose of the present study was to assess the reliability of assays of feedforward and feedback control in voice versus articulation domains. Twenty-eight participants (14 cisgender women, 12 cisgender men, one transgender man, one transmasculine/nonbinary) who denied any history of speech, hearing, or neurological impairment were measured for responses to predictable versus unexpected auditory feedback perturbations of vocal (fundamental frequency, ) and articulatory (first formant, ) acoustic parameters twice, with 3-6 weeks between sessions. Reliability was measured with intraclass correlations. Opposite patterns of reliability were observed for and ; reflexive responses showed good reliability and adaptive responses showed poor reliability, whereas reflexive responses showed poor reliability and adaptive responses showed moderate reliability. However, a criterion-referenced categorical measurement of adaptive responses as typical versus atypical showed substantial test-retest agreement. Individual responses to some behavioral assays of auditory-motor control of speech should be interpreted with caution, which has implications for several fields of research. Additional research is needed to establish reliable criterion-referenced measures of adaptive responses as well as and reflexive responses. Furthermore, the opposite patterns of test-retest reliability observed for voice versus articulation add to growing evidence for differences in underlying neural control mechanisms.