Literature DB >> 29623381

The impact of perilaryngeal vibration on the self-perception of loudness and the Lombard effect.

François-Xavier Brajot1,2,3, Don Nguyen4,5, Jeffrey DiGiovanni6, Vincent L Gracco4,5,7.   

Abstract

The role of somatosensory feedback in speech and the perception of loudness was assessed in adults without speech or hearing disorders. Participants completed two tasks: loudness magnitude estimation of a short vowel and oral reading of a standard passage. Both tasks were carried out in each of three conditions: no-masking, auditory masking alone, and mixed auditory masking plus vibration of the perilaryngeal area. A Lombard effect was elicited in both masking conditions: speakers unconsciously increased vocal intensity. Perilaryngeal vibration further increased vocal intensity above what was observed for auditory masking alone. Both masking conditions affected fundamental frequency and the first formant frequency as well, but only vibration was associated with a significant change in the second formant frequency. An additional analysis of pure-tone thresholds found no difference in auditory thresholds between masking conditions. Taken together, these findings indicate that perilaryngeal vibration effectively masked somatosensory feedback, resulting in an enhanced Lombard effect (increased vocal intensity) that did not alter speakers' self-perception of loudness. This implies that the Lombard effect results from a general sensorimotor process, rather than from a specific audio-vocal mechanism, and that the conscious self-monitoring of speech intensity is not directly based on either auditory or somatosensory feedback.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Lombard effect; Masking; Noise; Somatosensory feedback; Speech; Vibration

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29623381     DOI: 10.1007/s00221-018-5248-9

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Exp Brain Res        ISSN: 0014-4819            Impact factor:   1.972


  34 in total

1.  Effects of speech noise on vocal fundamental frequency using power spectral analysis.

Authors:  Guo-She Lee; Tzu-Yu Hsiao; Cheryl C H Yang; Terry B J Kuo
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2007-06       Impact factor: 3.570

2.  Effects of noise on speech production: acoustic and perceptual analyses.

Authors:  W V Summers; D B Pisoni; R H Bernacki; R I Pedlow; M A Stokes
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1988-09       Impact factor: 1.840

3.  Inhibiting the Lombard effect.

Authors:  H L Pick; G M Siegel; P W Fox; S R Garber; J K Kearney
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1989-02       Impact factor: 1.840

4.  The Lombard reflex and its role on human listeners and automatic speech recognizers.

Authors:  J C Junqua
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1993-01       Impact factor: 1.840

5.  Indication of a Lombard vocal response in the St. Lawrence River Beluga.

Authors:  P M Scheifele; S Andrew; R A Cooper; M Darre; F E Musiek; L Max
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2005-03       Impact factor: 1.840

6.  Laryngeal somatosensory deficits in Parkinson's disease: implications for speech respiratory and phonatory control.

Authors:  Michael J Hammer; Steven M Barlow
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2009-12-15       Impact factor: 1.972

7.  The Lombard sign as a function of age and task.

Authors:  D K Amazi; S R Garber
Journal:  J Speech Hear Res       Date:  1982-12

8.  Mental imagery of speech implicates two mechanisms of perceptual reactivation.

Authors:  Xing Tian; Jean Mary Zarate; David Poeppel
Journal:  Cortex       Date:  2016-01-14       Impact factor: 4.027

9.  Sensory attenuation of self-produced feedback: the Lombard effect revisited.

Authors:  Amanda S Therrien; James Lyons; Ramesh Balasubramaniam
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2012-11-08       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Vocal responses to perturbations in voice auditory feedback in individuals with Parkinson's disease.

Authors:  Hanjun Liu; Emily Q Wang; Leo Verhagen Metman; Charles R Larson
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2012-03-20       Impact factor: 3.240

View more
  2 in total

1.  Sensory error drives fine motor adjustment.

Authors:  Huimin Wang; Yuxuan Zhou; Huanhuan Li; Cynthia F Moss; Xingxing Li; Jinhong Luo
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2022-06-27       Impact factor: 12.779

2.  Early auditory responses to speech sounds in Parkinson's disease: preliminary data.

Authors:  Fatemeh Mollaei; Douglas M Shiller; Shari R Baum; Vincent L Gracco
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2022-01-19       Impact factor: 4.379

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.