Spectral, cepstral, and multivariate exploration of tracheoesophageal voice quality in continuous speech and sustained vowels

Laryngoscope

Volumn 119, Issue 12, 2009, Pages 2384-2394

  Maryn, Youri ^a,b,c   Dick, Catherine ^a   Vandenbruaene, Caroline ^a   Vauterin, Tom ^a   Jacobs, Tinne ^d  

^a Sint Jan General Hospital   (Belgium)

^b UNIVERSITY COLLEGE GHENT   (Belgium)

^c GHENT UNIVERSITY   (Belgium)

^d Thomas More University College   (Belgium)

Author keywords

Cepstral peak prominence; Continuous speech; Paired comparison task; Perturbation measures; Spectral peak prominence; Sustained vowels; Total laryngectomy; Tracheoesophageal voice

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; AUDITORY DISCRIMINATION; CLINICAL ARTICLE; FEMALE; HEARING; HUMAN; LARYNGECTOMY; MALE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SPECTROSCOPY; SPEECH; SPEECH ARTICULATION; SPEECH REHABILITATION; VOICE; VOWEL; AGED; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDY; ESOPHAGUS SPEECH; FOLLOW UP; METHODOLOGY; MIDDLE AGED; PATHOPHYSIOLOGY; PHYSIOLOGY; SPEECH ANALYSIS; SPEECH DISORDER; SPEECH INTELLIGIBILITY; TRACHEA;

AGED; CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDIES; FEMALE; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; SPEECH; SPEECH DISORDERS; SPEECH INTELLIGIBILITY; SPEECH PRODUCTION MEASUREMENT; SPEECH, ESOPHAGEAL; TRACHEA; VOICE QUALITY;

EID: 73949150447     PISSN: 0023852X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/lary.20620     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Ward EC, van As CJ. Head and Neck Cancer: Treatment, Rehabilitation and Outcomes. San Diego, CA: Plural Publishing; 2007.
2. Merwin GE, Goldstein LP, Rothman HB. A comparison of speech using artificial larynx and tracheoesophageal puncture with valve in the same speakers. Laryngoscope 1985;95:730-734.
3. Crevier-Buchmann L, Pfauwadel MC, Chabardes E, Laccourreye O, Brasnu D, Laccourreye H. Comparative study of temporal parameters of alaryngeal voices. Esophageal and tracheo-esophageal voices. Ann Otolaryngol Chir Cervicofac 1991;108:261-265.
4. Debruyne F, Delaere P, Wouters J, Uwents P. Acoustic analysis of tracheo-oesophageal versus oesophageal speech. J Laryngol Otol 1994;108:325-328.
5. Bertino G, Bellomo A, Miani C, Ferrero F, Staffieri A. Spectrographic differences between tracheal-esophageal and esophageal voice. Folia Phoniatr Logop 1996;48:255-261.
6. Lundstrom E, Hammarberg B, Munck-Wikland E, Edsborg N. The pharyngoesophageal segment in laryngectomees-videoradiographic, acoustic, and voice quality perceptual data. Logoped Phoniatr Vocol 2008;33:115-125.
7. Robbins J. Acoustic differentiation of laryngeal, esophageal, and tracheoesophageal speech. J Speech Hear Res 1984;27:577-585.
8. van As CJ, Hilgers FJM, Verdonck-de Leeuw IM, Koopmans-van Beinum FJ. Acoustical analysis and perceptual evaluation of tracheoesophageal prosthetic voice. J Voice 1998;12:239-248.
9. Arias MR, Ramon JL, Campos M, Cervantes JJ. Acoustic analysis of the voice in phonatory fistuloplasty after total laryngectomy. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2000;122:743-747.
10. Moerman M, Pieters G, Martens JP, Van der Borgt MJ, Dejonckere P. Objective evaluation of the quality of substitution voices. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2004;261:541-547.
11. Kazi R, Kiverniti E, Prasad V, et al. Multidimensional assessment of female tracheoesophageal prosthetic speech. Clin Otolaryngol 2006;31:511-517.
12. Stajner-Katusic S, Horga D, Musura M, Globlek D. Voice and speech after laryngectomy. Clin Linguist Phon 2006;20:195-203.
13. MacCallum JK, Cai L, Zhou L, Zhang Y, Jiang JJ. Acoustic analysis of aperiodic voice: perturbation and nonlinear dynamic properties in esophageal phonation. J Voice 2009;23:283-290.
14. Maryn Y, Corthals P, Van Cauwenberge P, Roy N, De Bodt M. Toward improved ecological validity in the acoustic measurement of overall voice quality: combining continuous speech and sustained vowels. J Voice. In press.
15. Dejonckere P, Lebacq J. Harmonic emergence in formant zone of a sustained [a] as a parameter for evaluating hoarseness. Acta Otorhinolaryngolog Belg 1987;41:988-996.
16. Kacha A, Grenez F, Schoentgen J. Voice quality assessment by means of comparative judgments of speech tokens. Paper presented at: Interspeech 2005-Eurospeech-9th European Conference on Speech Communication and Technology, September 4-8, 2005;Lisbon, Portugal.
17. Yiu EM, Chan KM, Mok RS. Reliability and confidence in using a paired comparison paradigm in perceptual voice quality paradigm. Clin Linguist Phon 2007;21:129-145.
18. Kreiman J, Gerratt BR, Ito M. When and why listeners disagree in voice quality assessment tasks. J Acoust Soc Am 2008;122:2354-2364.
19. Hillenbrand J, Houde RA. Acoustic correlates of breathy vocal quality: dysphonic voices and continuous speech. J Speech Hear Res 1996;39:311-321.
20. De Bodt MS, Wuyts FL, Van de Heyning PH, Croux C. Test-retest study of the GRBAS scale: influence of experience and professional background on perceptual rating of voice quality. J Voice 1997;11:74-80.
21. Frey LR, Botan CH, Friedman PG, Kreps GL. Investigating Communication, An Introduction to Research Methods. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall; 1991.
22. Chan KM, Yiu EM. The effect of anchors and training on the reliability of perceptual voice evaluation. J Speech Lang Hear Res 2002;45:111-126.
23. van As-Brooks CJ, Koopmans-van Beinum FJ, Pols LC, Hilgers FJ. Acoustic signal typing for evaluation of voice quality in tracheoesophageal speech. J Voice 2006;20:355-368.
24. Roark RM. Frequency and voice: perspectives in the time domain. J Voice 2006;20:325-354.
25. Titze IR. Workshop on Acoustic Voice Analysis: Summary Statement. Iowa City, IA: National Center for Voice and Speech; 1995.
26. Bielamowicz S, Kreiman J, Gerratt BR, Dauer MS, Berke GS. Comparison of voice analysis systems for perturbation measurement. J Speech Hear Res 1993;39:126-134.
27. Grolman W, Eerenstein SEJ, Tange RA, et al. Vocal efficiency in tracheoesophageal phonation. Auris Nasus Larynx 2008;35:83-88.
28. Eadie TL, Doyle PC. Auditory-perceptual scaling and quality of life in tracheoesophageal speakers. Laryngoscope 2004;114:753-759.