03 June 2013 by Charles Fernyhough
- Magazine issue 2919. Subscribe and save
 - For similar stories, visit the The Human Brain Topic Guide
 
IT CAN happen anywhere. I can be 
driving, walking by the river or sitting quietly in front of a blank 
screen. Sometimes suddenly, sometimes gradually and imperceptibly, I 
become conscious of words that no one else can hear, telling me things, 
guiding me, evaluating my actions. I am doing something perfectly 
ordinary – I am thinking– and it takes the form of a voice in my head.
If you ask people to reflect on their 
own stream of consciousness, they often describe experiences like this. 
Usually termed inner speech, it is also referred to as the inner voice, 
internal monologue or dialogue, or verbal thought. But although 
philosophers have long been interested in the relationship between 
language and thought, many believed that inner speech lay outside the 
realms of science. That is now changing, with new experimental designs 
for encouraging it, interfering with it and neuroimaging it. We are 
beginning to understand how the experience is created in the brain; its 
subjective qualities – essentially, what the words "sound" like; and its
 role in processes such as self-control and self-awareness. The voice in
 our head is finally revealing its secrets, and it is just as powerful 
as you might have imagined.
Much of modern research has been inspired by the long-neglected theories of L. S. Vygotsky,
 a Russian psychologist whose career unfolded in the early days of the 
Soviet Union. Vygotsky only studied psychology for about 10 years before
 his untimely death from tuberculosis in his late thirties – a fact that
 has led some to call him "the Mozart of psychology". Starting with 
observations of children talking to themselves while playing, Vygotsky 
hypothesised that this "private speech" develops out of social dialogue 
with parents and caregivers. Over time, these private mutterings become 
further internalised to form inner speech.
If Vygotsky was right, inner speech 
should have some very special properties. Because it develops from 
social interactions, it should take on some of the qualities of a 
dialogue, an exchange between different points of view. Vygotsky also 
proposed that inner speech undergoes some important transformations as 
it becomes internalised, such as becoming abbreviated or condensed 
relative to external speech. For instance, when hearing a loud metallic 
sound outside at night and realising that the cat is to blame, you 
probably wouldn't say to yourself, "The cat has knocked the dustbin 
over." Instead, you might just say, "The cat," since that utterance 
contains all the information you need to express to yourself.
Partly because Vygotsky's work was 
suppressed by the Soviet authorities, it was a long time before his 
ideas became well known in the West, and even longer before researchers 
tested whether people actually report these qualities in their inner 
speech. In the first such study, conducted in 2011 at Durham University,
 UK, my colleague Simon McCarthy-Jones and I found that 60 per cent of 
people report that their inner speech has the to-and-fro quality of a 
conversation.
Eavesdropping on thoughts
So-called "self-report" methods have 
their limitations, not least that people are being asked to comment 
retrospectively on their inner experience. Another method, offering a 
richer picture of people's thoughts during a particular time period, was
 developed by psychologist Russell Hurlburt
 at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas. It involves participants being 
trained to give very detailed descriptions of their own inner experience
 in response to random cues from a beeper. Such studies have shown that 
people often report a train of thought unfolding more quickly than 
circumstances ought to have allowed, and yet not seeming rushed, which 
could be taken as evidence for the compression of sentences that 
Vygotsky postulated.
Vygotsky's theory also suggests some 
possibilities about the way inner speech is created in the brain. If it 
is derived from external speech, as he proposed, both might be expected 
to activate the same neural networks. Sure enough, long after his death,
 fMRI studies have linked inner speech to the left inferior frontal 
gyrus, including a region called Broca's area, which is known to be 
important for speech production.
Quite how much our inner and outer 
speech overlap remains a matter of debate. According to one view, inner 
speech is just external speech without articulation: the brain plans an 
utterance, but stops short of kicking our muscles into action. If that 
is the case, our internal voice should resonate with the same qualities 
of tone, timbre and accent as our ordinary external speech.
There are some hints that this may be 
the case. In their lab at the University of Nottingham, UK, 
psychologists Ruth Filik and Emma Barber recently asked participants to read limericks silently in their heads. One was: There
 was a young runner from Bath, Who stumbled and fell on the path; She 
didn't get picked, As the coach was quite strict, So he gave the 
position to Kath.
The other limerick read: There was 
an old lady from Bath, Who waved to her son down the path; He opened the
 gates, And bumped into his mates, Who were Gerry, and Simon, and Garth.
Importantly, some of the participants 
had northern English accents, with short vowels (pronouncing "Bath" to 
rhyme with "Kath"), while the others had the long vowels of a southern 
accent ("Bath" rhyming with "Garth"). By tracking the volunteers' 
eye-movements, the researchers showed that reading was disrupted when 
the final word of the limerick did not rhyme in that volunteer's accent –
 when a southerner read "Bath" then "Kath", for instance. Although this 
study suggests that inner speech does indeed have an accent – and 
presumably other qualities of our spoken voice – one concern is that the
 inner speech we produce when reading is not necessarily the same thing 
as our everyday, spontaneous inner speech, which means that more 
naturalistic studies are needed.
So much for the subjective qualities 
of inner speech. What, if anything, does it actually do? Vygotsky 
proposed that words in inner speech function as psychological tools that
 transform the task in question, just as the use of a screwdriver 
transforms the task of assembling a shed. Putting our thoughts into 
words gives them a more tangible form which makes them easier to use. It
 may also be that verbal thought can allow communication between other 
cognitive systems, effectively providing a common language for the 
brain.
One of Vygotsky's most enticing 
predictions was that private and inner speech give us a way of taking 
control of our own behaviour, by using words to direct our actions. 
While driving up to a roundabout in busy traffic, for example, I'll 
still tell myself, "Give way to the right", especially if I've just been
 driving overseas. Knocking out the systems responsible for inner speech
 should therefore impede our performance on certain tasks that require 
planning and control, offering a powerful test of the hypothesis.
Such experiments typically require 
participants to repeat a word to themselves out loud to suppress their 
verbal thoughts while they perform a task (a technique known as 
articulatory suppression). Using this set-up, Jane Lidstone, one of my 
colleagues at Durham University, looked at the performance of children 
aged 7 to 10 on a planning task known as the Tower of London, which 
involves moving coloured balls around between three sticks of differing 
lengths in order to match a given pattern. Lidstone found that children 
performed worse if they had to repeat a word out loud,
 compared with trials in which they instead tapped repetitively with one
 of their feet. Similar findings have emerged from studies with adults. 
Alexa Tullett and Michael Inzlicht of the University of Toronto in 
Canada gave student participants a classic test of control known as the Go/No-Go task,
 which required them to press a button the moment they saw a yellow 
square pop up on the screen, but to remain still when they saw a purple 
square. It is a considerable test of impulse control, and, as predicted,
 the students were less accurate
 during articulatory suppression, compared with when they were doing a 
spatial task. Although experiments like these seem artificial, they 
allow researchers the kind of control over conditions that good science 
demands to test something like self-control.
Pep talks
So we know that inner speech has a 
role in regulating behaviour, but could it also have a role in 
motivating it? The research on children's private speech (Vygotsky's 
precursor of inner speech, remember) shows that it frequently has an 
emotional or motivational flavour. Athletes often give themselves pep 
talks before, during and after performances. In our study of the quality
 of inner speech, McCarthy-Jones and I found that two-thirds of students
 reported using internal speech that either evaluated their behaviour or
 served to motivate it.
Inner speech may even help us to 
become aware of who we are as individuals. Some philosophers have 
proposed that awareness of inner speech is important for understanding 
our own mental processes, an aspect of what psychologists call 
metacognition. Children typically do not become aware of their own inner
 speech until around age 4, although it is uncertain whether that 
reflects their inability to reflect on their own thought processes, or 
the fact that inner speech is not yet fully internalised by that age. At
 Mount Royal University in Calgary, Canada, psychologist Alain Morin
 has found that people who use inner speech more often show better 
self-understanding. "Inner speech allows us to verbally analyse our 
emotions, motives, thoughts and behavioural patterns," he says. "It puts
 to the forefront of consciousness what would otherwise remain mostly 
subconscious."
While researchers are still gathering 
the evidence, these results certainly suggest that the voice in the head
 is important to many cognitive processes. But what about people who, 
for various reasons, don't talk to themselves in the usual way? As you 
might expect, deaf people who communicate in sign language often talk to
 themselves in sign too. People with autism, meanwhile, who often have 
problems with linguistic communication, seem not to use inner speech for
 planning, although they do use it for other purposes such as short-term
 memory. A more dramatic difficulty comes from damage to the language 
areas of the brain, which can silence some people's inner voices. One 
such individual, neuroanatomist Jill Bolte Taylor, reported a lack of self-awareness after a stroke that damaged her language system – supporting Morin's view that verbal thinking may be important for self-understanding.
Lending an ear to the differences 
between people might also tell us more about the dark side of inner 
speech, following a growing understanding that our internal monologue is
 not always beneficial to our well-being. When we worry and ruminate, we
 often do it in words, and our inner speech may contribute to anxiety 
and depression by keeping thoughts in the head that would be better off 
discarded. Inner speech may play its biggest role, however, in an 
experience that is often associated with other forms of mental disorder.
 People with certain psychiatric diagnoses (particularly schizophrenia),
 but also a small minority of people who do not have a mental illness, 
report the experience of hearing a person speak when there is no one 
present. Voice-hearing, or auditory verbal hallucination, is an 
enigmatic phenomenon whose cognitive and neural bases are not yet well 
understood. One prominent theory proposes that it occurs because the 
individual produces an utterance in inner speech that they do not 
recognise as their own. The result is that a bit of speech that was 
actually self-generated becomes attributed to another person: an alien 
voice.
Various lines of evidence converge to 
support this view. An early observation was that people who hear voices 
produce very slight activation in their articulatory muscles when their 
voices occur. Cognitive behaviour therapy to treat voice-hearing often 
focuses on blocking the phonological loop, by articulatory suppression 
or listening to music, so that the rogue inner speech cannot be 
generated. But the phenomenon of voice-hearing is undoubtedly more 
complicated than this. McCarthy-Jones, now at Macquarie University in 
New South Wales, Australia, notes that "while inner speech appears to be
 the basis of some voices, others are actual or mutated memories of 
earlier life-events (often traumatic ones)". Many researchers, 
particularly those associated with the worldwide hearingthevoice.org/looking-for-support
 Hearing Voices Movement, now believe that voices have important 
meanings for the individual, and therefore that they need to be 
understood rather than suppressed.
A shower of words
There is much more we need to learn 
about inner speech's roles in our thinking and behaviour. Some insights 
may come from people who, without any disability, don't report any inner
 speech at all. For some of these people, it may be that inner speech is
 present, but that it is so condensed and abbreviated that it no longer 
seems very like language. It will also be interesting to note the 
consequences when people try to suppress their inner speech (and indeed 
all conscious thought) through varieties of meditation.
One thing we can be sure about is that 
inner speech takes many forms. Some will be good for explicit 
self-regulation and motivation; others will be closer to a kind of deep 
thinking with no particular sound quality. In fact, understanding inner 
speech better will help us to be clearer about what we mean by the 
nebulous term "thinking", and in this way make progress with some 
long-standing philosophical problems about how language, cognition and consciousness work together.
When I think about my own inner 
speech, I keep coming back to Vygotsky's ideas about "condensation". 
Sometimes I catch myself in the middle of a full-blown argument with 
myself, debating things from different points of view. Most of the time,
 though, the experience is more fragmentary: thoughts and feelings that 
are close to being put into language, but are not yet quite the kind of 
speech you would hear spoken out loud. Vygotsky likened this transition 
of thought into speech to "a cloud shedding a shower of words". 
Condensed or expanded, this rich internal dialogue must hold clues to 
understanding the distinctively creative, flexible properties of human 
thought.
This article appeared in print under the headline "Life in the chatter box"
Bibliography
- Links to the relevant papers can be found in the online version of this article
 


No hay comentarios.:
Publicar un comentario