Nd when two or far 
more judges marked precisely the same error, it was recorded within a final transcript. Second, Study 2C analyzed the neologisms, false starts, dysfluencies, and off-topic comments that had been eliminated in the transcripts in Research 1 and MacKay et al. [2]. Neologisms included all non-standard pronunciations of a familiar word; dysfluencies have been “um”s and “uh”s; off-topic comments were irrelevant remarks about the process or the experimenter (e.g., “How’s that suit you”, where that refers to a self-produced response, and also you towards the experimenter); and false begins were sentence-level revisions or adjustments (excluding error corrections), exactly where a speaker started with one program or intended output, then shifted to yet another. One example is, “they believe it’s–they can’t do it because it’s as well hard” was coded as a false get started because the participant began to say they believe it really is as well hard but switched to “they can’t do it mainly because it’s too hard”.Brain Sci. 2013,Lastly, Study 2C determined the frequency of three sorts of repetition: stutters, unmodified word string repetitions, and elaborative repetitions. Following MacKay and MacDonald [71], stutters involved immediate repetitions of word-initial speech sounds, syllables, and words, e.g., “s–school” (repetition of a word-initial speech sound). Unmodified word string repetitions involved immediate repetition of a sequence of words without correction, as in “but it was, but it was”. Elaborative repetitions involved repetition of a single or additional ideas in distinctly distinct phrases. The repeated words italicized in (44) illustrate a stutter (it, it) and two elaborative repetitions (that bus, the scrawny bus, and drive it off … it drives it off”, exactly where drives elaborates the idea drive). The repeated words italicized in (45) illustrate an unmodified word string repetition (it really is crowded … it’s crowded) and two elaborative repetitions (it’s crowded … also crowded, and to go on the bus … to acquire around the bus, where get PubMed ID:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21338877 elaborates conceptual go). The repeated words italicized in (46) illustrate an elaborative repetition (this pie is … the pie right here was back right here, where was elaborates is as + previous). (44). H.M.: “Melanie tra … on that bus, the scrawny bus and have it drive it off … it, it drives it off.” (repeated words in Calcipotriol Impurity C site italics) (45). H.M.: …she desires to go on the bus … and it’s crowded … it really is crowded … Too crowded to acquire around the bus. (repeated words in italics) (46). H.M.: “Well this pie is- or the pie here was (is + Past) back here–” (brackets ours) six.2. Outcomes H.M. produced no far more minor word, morpheme, and phonological retrieval errors than the controls. The imply quantity of word and morpheme retrieval errors per response was 0.00 for H.M. and 0.00 for the controls (SD = 0.00), with absolute Ns also small for meaningful statistical evaluation. The only feasible phonological retrieval error inside the database was ambiguous: “Is it crowded” in (47) transposes either the phonological units s and t or the words is and it within the BPC It is crowded. Nevertheless, this error was neither a minor phonological error nor a minor word retrieval error since (a) it was uncorrected, and (b) it and is belong to distinct lexical categories (pronoun and copular verb). The imply variety of minor phonological sequencing errors was consequently 0.07 per response for H.M. versus 0.01 for the controls (SD = 0.04), a non-reliable 1.5 SD difference with Ns as well small for meaningful evaluation. (47). H.M.: “Is it crowded…” (BPC ba.