Nd when two or much more judges marked precisely the same error, it was recorded in a final transcript. Second, Study 2C analyzed the neologisms, false begins, dysfluencies, and off-topic comments that were eliminated from the transcripts in Studies 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 activity 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 have been sentence-level revisions or changes (excluding error corrections), where a speaker started with a single program or intended output, then shifted to an additional. One example is, “they feel it’s–they can not do it since it is also hard” was coded as a false start since the participant began to say they believe it’s too difficult but switched to “they can’t do it for the reason that it’s also hard”.Brain Sci. 2013,Finally, Study 2C determined the frequency of 3 kinds 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 instant repetition of a sequence of words with out correction, as in “but it was, nevertheless it was”. Elaborative repetitions involved repetition of one 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”, where drives elaborates the idea drive). The repeated words italicized in (45) illustrate an unmodified word string repetition (it is crowded … it’s crowded) and two elaborative repetitions (it is crowded … also crowded, and to go on the bus … to obtain on the bus, exactly 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 here was back right here, where was elaborates is as + past). (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 italics) (45). H.M.: …she desires to go on the bus … and it’s crowded … it’s crowded … As well crowded to obtain on the bus. (repeated words in italics) (46). H.M.: “Well this pie is- or the pie here was (is + Previous) back here–” (brackets ours) six.two. Outcomes H.M. developed no extra minor word, morpheme, and phonological retrieval errors than the controls. The imply number of word and get MP-A08 morpheme retrieval errors per response was 0.00 for H.M. and 0.00 for the controls (SD = 0.00), with absolute Ns too tiny for meaningful statistical evaluation. The only probable phonological retrieval error in the database was ambiguous: “Is it crowded” in (47) transposes either the phonological units s and t or the words is and it in the BPC It’s crowded. On the other hand, this error was neither a minor phonological error nor a minor word retrieval error because (a) it was uncorrected, and (b) it and is belong to distinct lexical categories (pronoun and copular verb). The imply number of minor phonological sequencing errors was therefore 0.07 per response for H.M. versus 0.01 for the controls (SD = 0.04), a non-reliable 1.five SD difference with Ns as well modest for meaningful evaluation. (47). H.M.: “Is it crowded…” (BPC ba.