The FLMP STMPed

Massaro and Chen (2008) offer a commentary ostensibly on a recent article by Galantucci, Fowler, and Turvey (2006). Our article provided an evaluation of Alvin Liberman’s motor theory of speech perception. We considered it timely to evaluate the motor theory’s different claims, and we hoped to understand why the theory has been better received outside the field of speech than within it. Accordingly, we evaluated its component claims and embedded our presentation of the theory within a wider scientific context, rather than restricting it to the field of speech. However, Massaro and Chen did not undertake to understand the motor theory or to evaluate the effort by Galantucci et al. Rather, they chose to evaluate a different theory of speech than the one on which Galantucci et al. focused. They evaluated direct-realist theory, erroneously referring to it as a motor theory. I take this opportunity to clarify the difference, staving off potential confusion, and to address other errors in their critique.