Literature DB >> 19363172

Standardization of pitch-range settings in voice acoustic analysis.

Adam P Vogel1, Paul Maruff, Peter J Snyder, James C Mundt.   

Abstract

Voice acoustic analysis is typically a labor-intensive, time-consuming process that requires the application of idiosyncratic parameters tailored to individual aspects of the speech signal. Such processes limit the efficiency and utility of voice analysis in clinical practice as well as in applied research and development. In the present study, we analyzed 1,120 voice files, using standard techniques (case-by-case hand analysis), taking roughly 10 work weeks of personnel time to complete. The results were compared with the analytic output of several automated analysis scripts that made use of preset pitch-range parameters. After pitch windows were selected to appropriately account for sex differences, the automated analysis scripts reduced processing time of the 1,120 speech samples to less than 2.5 h and produced results comparable to those obtained with hand analysis. However, caution should be exercised when applying the suggested preset values to pathological voice populations.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19363172      PMCID: PMC2669687          DOI: 10.3758/BRM.41.2.318

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Behav Res Methods        ISSN: 1554-351X


  21 in total

1.  Re: Evaluation of voice quality.

Authors:  P Carding; E Carlson; R Epstein; L Mathieson; C Shewell
Journal:  Int J Lang Commun Disord       Date:  2001 Jan-Mar       Impact factor: 3.020

2.  Adverse effects of environmental noise on acoustic voice quality measurements.

Authors:  Dimitar D Deliyski; Heather S Shaw; Maegan K Evans
Journal:  J Voice       Date:  2005-03       Impact factor: 2.009

3.  Influence of sampling rate on accuracy and reliability of acoustic voice analysis.

Authors:  Dimitar D Deliyski; Heather S Shaw; Maegan K Evans
Journal:  Logoped Phoniatr Vocol       Date:  2005       Impact factor: 1.487

4.  The effect of speaking task on perceptual judgment of the severity of dysphonic voice.

Authors:  Richard I Zraick; Kristen Wendel; Laura Smith-Olinde
Journal:  J Voice       Date:  2005-12       Impact factor: 2.009

5.  Comparison of various automatic means for measuring mean fundamental frequency.

Authors:  R J Morris; W S Brown
Journal:  J Voice       Date:  1996-06       Impact factor: 2.009

6.  Accuracy of jitter estimates using different filter settings on Visi-Pitch: a preliminary report.

Authors:  C K Perry; D R Ingrisano; S R Scott
Journal:  J Voice       Date:  1996-12       Impact factor: 2.009

7.  The cleft audit protocol for speech-augmented: A validated and reliable measure for auditing cleft speech.

Authors:  Alexandra John; Debbie Sell; Triona Sweeney; Anne Harding-Bell; Alison Williams
Journal:  Cleft Palate Craniofac J       Date:  2006-05

8.  The use of perceptual methods by new clinicians for assessing voice quality.

Authors:  C J Bassich; C L Ludlow
Journal:  J Speech Hear Disord       Date:  1986-05

9.  Comparison of fundamental frequency and perturbation measurements among three analysis systems.

Authors:  M P Karnell; K D Hall; K L Landahl
Journal:  J Voice       Date:  1995-12       Impact factor: 2.009

10.  Comparison of Fo extraction methods for high-precision voice perturbation measurements.

Authors:  I R Titze; H Liang
Journal:  J Speech Hear Res       Date:  1993-12
View more
  11 in total

1.  The relationship between acoustical and perceptual measures of vocal effort.

Authors:  Victoria S McKenna; Cara E Stepp
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2018-09       Impact factor: 1.840

2.  A psychometric investigation of "macroscopic" speech measures for clinical and psychological science.

Authors:  Alex S Cohen; Tyler L Renshaw; Kyle R Mitchell; Yunjung Kim
Journal:  Behav Res Methods       Date:  2016-06

3.  Vocal expression in schizophrenia: Less than meets the ear.

Authors:  Alex S Cohen; Kyle R Mitchell; Nancy M Docherty; William P Horan
Journal:  J Abnorm Psychol       Date:  2016-02

4.  Vocal acoustic biomarkers of depression severity and treatment response.

Authors:  James C Mundt; Adam P Vogel; Douglas E Feltner; William R Lenderking
Journal:  Biol Psychiatry       Date:  2012-04-26       Impact factor: 13.382

5.  Aprosodia and prosoplegia with right frontal neurodegeneration.

Authors:  James R Bateman; Christopher M Filley; Elliott D Ross; Brianne M Bettcher; H Isabel Hubbard; Miranda Babiak; Peter S Pressman
Journal:  Neurocase       Date:  2019-07-23       Impact factor: 0.881

6.  Vocal acoustic analysis as a biometric indicator of information processing: implications for neurological and psychiatric disorders.

Authors:  Alex S Cohen; Thomas J Dinzeo; Neila J Donovan; Caitlin E Brown; Sean C Morrison
Journal:  Psychiatry Res       Date:  2015-01-14       Impact factor: 3.222

7.  [Effects of different tasks on determination of the speaking fundamental frequency].

Authors:  B Barsties
Journal:  HNO       Date:  2013-07       Impact factor: 1.284

8.  Healthy Communication Partners Modify Their Speech When Conversing With Individuals With Parkinson's Disease.

Authors:  Nichola Lubold; Megan M Willi; Stephanie A Borrie; Tyson S Barrett; Visar Berisha
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2021-04-08       Impact factor: 2.297

9.  Was facial width-to-height ratio subject to sexual selection pressures? A life course approach.

Authors:  Carolyn R Hodges-Simeon; Graham Albert; George B Richardson; Timothy S McHale; Seth M Weinberg; Michael Gurven; Steven J C Gaulin
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2021-03-12       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  The Feasibility of Using Acoustic Markers of Speech for Optimizing Patient Outcomes during Randomized Amplitude Variation in Deep Brain Stimulation: A Proof of Principle Methods Study.

Authors:  Adam P Vogel; Hugh J McDermott; Thushara Perera; Mary Jones; Richard Peppard; Colette M McKay
Journal:  Front Bioeng Biotechnol       Date:  2015-07-14
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.