Literature DB >> 19185451

Perceptual distances of breathy voice quality: a comparison of psychophysical methods.

Sona Patel1, Rahul Shrivastav, David A Eddins.   

Abstract

Experiments to study voice quality have typically used rating scales or direct magnitude estimation to obtain listener judgments. Unfortunately, the data obtained using these tasks are context dependent, which makes it difficult to compare perceptual judgments of voice quality across experiments. The present experiment describes a simple matching task to quantify voice quality. The data obtained through this task were compared to perceptual judgments obtained using rating scale and direct magnitude estimation tasks to determine whether the three tasks provide equivalent perceptual distances across stimuli. Ten synthetic vowel continua that varied in terms of their aspiration noise were evaluated for breathiness using each of the three tasks. Linear and nonlinear regressions were used to compare the perceptual distances between stimuli obtained through each technique. Results show that the perceptual distances estimated from matching and direct magnitude estimation task are similar, but both differ from the rating scale task, suggesting that the matching task provides perceptual distances with ratio-level measurement properties. The matching task is advantageous for measurement of vocal quality because it provides reliable measurement with ratio-level scale properties. It allows the use of a fixed reference signal for all comparisons, thus allowing researchers to directly compare findings across different experiments. Copyright (c) 2010 The Voice Foundation. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19185451      PMCID: PMC2860754          DOI: 10.1016/j.jvoice.2008.08.002

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Voice        ISSN: 0892-1997            Impact factor:   2.009


  17 in total

1.  Measuring vocal quality with speech synthesis.

Authors:  B R Gerratt; J Kreiman
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2001-11       Impact factor: 1.840

2.  A comparison of equal-appearing interval scaling and direct magnitude estimation of nasal voice quality.

Authors:  R I Zraick; J M Liss
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2000-08       Impact factor: 2.297

Review 3.  A physiological profile approach to falls risk assessment and prevention.

Authors:  Stephen R Lord; Hylton B Menz; Anne Tiedemann
Journal:  Phys Ther       Date:  2003-03

4.  Direct magnitude estimation and interval scaling of pleasantness and severity in dysphonic and normal speakers.

Authors:  Tanya L Eadie; Philip C Doyle
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2002-12       Impact factor: 1.840

5.  Subjective scaling of length and area and the matching of length to loudness and brightness.

Authors:  S S STEVENS; M GUIRAO
Journal:  J Exp Psychol       Date:  1963-08

6.  Auditory perception of temporal and spectral events in patients with focal left and right cerebral lesions.

Authors:  D A Robin; D Tranel; H Damasio
Journal:  Brain Lang       Date:  1990-11       Impact factor: 2.381

7.  Perception of aperiodicity in pathological voice.

Authors:  Jody Kreiman; Bruce R Gerratt
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2005-04       Impact factor: 1.840

8.  Application of psychometric theory to the measurement of voice quality using rating scales.

Authors:  Rahul Shrivastav; Christine M Sapienza; Vuday Nandur
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2005-04       Impact factor: 2.297

Review 9.  Perceptual evaluation of voice quality: review, tutorial, and a framework for future research.

Authors:  J Kreiman; B R Gerratt; G B Kempster; A Erman; G S Berke
Journal:  J Speech Hear Res       Date:  1993-02

10.  Objective measures of breathy voice quality obtained using an auditory model.

Authors:  Rahul Shrivastav; Christine M Sapienza
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2003-10       Impact factor: 1.840

View more
  11 in total

1.  Developing a single comparison stimulus for matching breathy voice quality.

Authors:  Sona Patel; Rahul Shrivastav; David A Eddins
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2012-01-03       Impact factor: 2.297

2.  Pitch strength of normal and dysphonic voices.

Authors:  Rahul Shrivastav; David A Eddins; Supraja Anand
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2012-03       Impact factor: 1.840

3.  Psychometric properties associated with perceived vocal roughness using a matching task.

Authors:  David A Eddins; Rahul Shrivastav
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2013-10       Impact factor: 1.840

4.  Identifying a comparison for matching rough voice quality.

Authors:  Sona Patel; Rahul Shrivastav; David A Eddins
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2012-02-21       Impact factor: 2.297

5.  Acoustic and perceptual effects of left-right laryngeal asymmetries based on computational modeling.

Authors:  Robin A Samlan; Brad H Story; Andrew J Lotto; Kate Bunton
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2014-10       Impact factor: 2.297

6.  Comparing two methods for reducing variability in voice quality measurements.

Authors:  Jody Kreiman; Bruce R Gerratt
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2010-11-16       Impact factor: 2.297

7.  The Perception of Breathiness in the Voices of Pediatric Speakers.

Authors:  Lisa M Kopf; Mark D Skowronski; Supraja Anand; David A Eddins; Rahul Shrivastav
Journal:  J Voice       Date:  2017-11-20       Impact factor: 2.009

8.  Modeling of Breathy Voice Quality Using Pitch-strength Estimates.

Authors:  David A Eddins; Supraja Anand; Arturo Camacho; Rahul Shrivastav
Journal:  J Voice       Date:  2016-01-07       Impact factor: 2.009

9.  A computational model to predict changes in breathiness resulting from variations in aspiration noise level.

Authors:  Rahul Shrivastav; Arturo Camacho
Journal:  J Voice       Date:  2009-11-05       Impact factor: 2.009

10.  The Effect of Visual Sort and Rate Versus Visual Analog Scales on the Reliability of Judgments of Dysphonia.

Authors:  Mara R Kapsner-Smith; Amanda Opuszynski; Cara E Stepp; Tanya L Eadie
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2021-04-28       Impact factor: 2.297

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.