The evolution of the Lombard effect: 100 years of psychoacoustic research

Behaviour

Volumn 148, Issue 11-13, 2011, Pages 1173-1198

  Brumm, Henrik ^a   Zollinger, Anne ^a  

^a MAX PLANCK INSTITUTE FOR ORNITHOLOGY   (Germany)

Author keywords

acoustic communication; auditory feedback; Lombard effect; noise; signal amplitude; vocal plasticity

Indexed keywords

EID: 83455166639     PISSN: 00057959     EISSN: 1568539X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1163/000579511X605759     Document Type: Review

References (134)

1. Adams, S., Moon, B.H., Dykstra, A., Abrams, K., Jenkins, M. & Jog, M. (2006). Effects of multitalker noise on conversational speech intensity in Parkinson's disease.-J. Med. Speech-Lang. Pathol. 14: 221-228.
2. Adams, S.G. & Lang, A.E. (1992). Can the Lombard effect be used to improve the low voice intensity in Parkinson disease?-Eur. J. Disorders Commun. 27: 121-127.
3. Amazi, D.K. & Garber, S.R. (1982). The Lombard sign as a function of age and task.-J. Speech Hearing Res. 25: 581-585. (Pubitemid 13106518)
4. Bárány, R. (1908). Noise apparatus for the detection of unilateral deafness.-J. Laryngol. Rhinol. Otol. 23: 363-364.
5. Bárány, R. (1910). Rectification.-Annales des Maladies de l'Oreille et du Larynx 36: 110.
6. Beckers, G.J.L., Suthers, R.A. & ten Cate, C. (2003). Mechanisms of frequency and amplitude modulation in ring dove song.-J. Exp. Biol. 206: 1833-1843. (Pubitemid 36715027)
7. Bermudez-Cuamatzin, E., Rios-Chelen, A.A., Gil, D. & Garcia, C.M. (2009). Strategies of song adaptation to urban noise in the house finch: syllable pitch plasticity or differential syllable use?-Behaviour 146: 1269-1286.
8. Bermúdez-Cuamatzin, E., Ríos-Chelén, A.A., Gil, D. & Garcia, C.M. (2011). Experimental evidence for real-time song frequency shift in response to urban noise in a passerine bird.-Biol. Lett. 7: 36-38.
9. Bininda-Emonds, O.R.P., Cardillo, M., Jones, K.E., MacPhee, R.D.E., Beck, R.M.D., Grenyer, R., Price, S.A., Vos, R.A., Gittleman, J.L. & Purvis, A. (2007). The delayed rise of present-day mammals.-Nature 446: 507-512. (Pubitemid 46514725)
10. Bou-Ghazale, S.E. & Hansen, J.H.L. (2000). A comparative study of traditional and newly proposed features for recognition of speech under stress.-IEEE Trans. Speech Audit. Process. 8: 429-442.
11. Brumm, H. (2004). The impact of environmental noise on song amplitude in a territorial bird.-J. Anim. Ecol. 73: 434-440. (Pubitemid 38583739)
12. Brumm, H. (2010). Anthropogenic noise: implications for conservation.-In: Encyclopedia of animal behavior (Breed, M.D. & Moore, J., eds). Academic Press, Oxford, p. 89-93.
13. Brumm, H. & Naguib, M. (2009). Environmental acoustics and the evolution of bird song.-Adv. Stud. Behav. 40: 1-33.
14. Brumm, H., Schmidt, R. & Schrader, L. (2009). Noise-dependent vocal plasticity in domestic fowl.-Anim. Behav. 78: 741-746.
15. Brumm, H. & Slabbekoorn, H. (2005). Acoustic communication in noise.-Adv. Stud. Behav. 35: 151-209. (Pubitemid 43574773)
16. Brumm, H. & Slater, P.J.B. (2006a). Animals can vary signal amplitude with receiver distance: evidence from zebra finch song.-Anim. Behav. 71: 699-705. (Pubitemid 44311119)
17. Brumm, H. & Slater, P.J.B. (2006b). Ambient noise, motor fatigue and serial redundancy in chaffinch song.-Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 60: 475-481.
18. Brumm, H. & Todt, D. (2002). Noise-dependent song amplitude regulation in a territorial songbird.-Anim. Behav. 63: 891-897. (Pubitemid 34749790)
19. Brumm, H., Voss, K., Köllmer, I. & Todt, D. (2004). Acoustic communication in noise: regulation of call characteristics in a New World monkey.-J. Exp. Biol. 207: 443-448. (Pubitemid 38162380)
20. Castellanos, A., Benedi, J.M. & Casacuberta, F. (1996). An analysis of general acoustic-phonetic features for Spanish speech produced with the Lombard effect.-Speech Commun. 20: 23-35. (Pubitemid 126371275)
21. Catchpole, C.K. & Slater, P.J.B. (2008). Bird song. Biological themes and variations, 2nd edn.-Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
22. Chi, S.M. & Oh, Y.H. (1996). Spectral magnitude normalisation and cepstral coefficient transform for noisy-Lombard speech recognition.-Electron. Lett. 32: 1761-1763.
23. Cooke, M. & Lu, Y. (2010). Spectral and temporal changes to speech produced in the presence of energetic and informational maskers.-J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 128: 2059-2069.
24. Cynx, J., Lewis, R., Tavel, B. & Tse, H. (1998). Amplitude regulation of vocalizations in noise by a songbird, Taeniopygia guttata.-Anim. Behav. 56: 107-113. (Pubitemid 28348965)
25. Draegert, G.L. (1951). Relationships between voice variables and speech intelligibility in high level noise.-Speech Monogr. 18: 272-278.
26. Egan, J.J. (1971). The Lombard reflex.-Arch. Otolaryngol. 94: 310-312.
27. Egan, J.J. (1972). Psychoacoustics of the Lombard voice response.-J. Audit. Res. 12: 318-324.
28. Egan, J.J. (1975). Use of the Lombard response in cases of hysterical aphonia.-Arch. Otolaryngol. Head Neck Surg. 101: 557-557.
29. Egnor, S.E.R. & Hauser, M.D. (2006). Noise-induced vocal modulation in cotton-top tamarins (Saguinus oedipus).-Am. J. Primatol. 68: 1183-1190. (Pubitemid 44902561)
30. Embleton, T.F.W. (1996). Tutorial on sound propagation outdoors.-J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 100: 1183-1190.
31. Fernández-Juricic, E., Poston, R., Collibus, K.D., Morgan, T., Bastain, B., Martin, C., Jones, K. & Treminio, R. (2005). Microhabitat selection and singing behavior patterns of male house finches (Carpodacus mexicanus) in urban parks in a heavily urbanized landscape in the Western U.S.-Urb. Habit. 3: 49-69.
32. Garnier, M., Henric, N. & Dubois, D. (2010). Influence of sound immersion and communicative interaction on the lombard effect.-J. Speech Lang. Hearing Res. 53: 588-608.
33. Gerhardt, H. & Huber, F. (2002). Acoustic communication in insects and anurans.-The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL.
34. Goller, F.M. & Cooper, B.G. (2008). Peripheral mechanisms of sensorimotor integration during singing.-In: Neuroscience of birdsong (Zeigler, H.P. & Marler, P., eds). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, p. 99-114.
35. Gosy, M. (2007). Disfluencies and self-monitoring.-Govor 24: 91-110.
36. Gramming, P. (1991). Vocal loudness and frequency capabilities of the voice.-J. Voice 5: 144-157.
37. Greenfield, M.D. (2005). Mechanisms and evolution of communal sexual displays in artho-prods and anurans.-Adv. Stud. Behav. 35: 1-54.
38. Hage, S.R., Jürgens, U. & Ehret, G. (2006). Audio-vocal interaction in the pontine brainstem during self-initiated vocalization in the squirrel monkey.-Eur. J. Neurosci. 23: 3297-3308.
39. Halfwerk, W. & Slabbekoorn, H. (2009). A behavioural mechanism explaining noise-dependent frequency use in urban birdsong.-Anim. Behav. 78: 1301-1307.
40. Halphen, E. (1910). Des lésions traumatiques de l'oreille interne.-Thesis, University of Paris, Paris.
41. Hanley, C.N. & Harvey, D.G. (1965). Quantifying the Lombard effect.-J. Speech Hearing Disord. 30: 274-277.
42. Hansen, J.H.L. & Cairns, D.A. (1995). ICARUS-source generator based real-time recognition of speech in noisy stressful and Lombard effect environments.-Speech Commun. 16: 391-422.
43. Ho, A.K., Bradshaw, J.L., Iansek, R. & Alfredson, R. (1999). Speech volume regulation in Parkinson's disease: effects of implicit cues and explicit instructions.-Neuropsy-chologia 37: 1453-1460.
44. Hodgson, M., Steininger, G. & Razavi, Z. (2007). Measurement and prediction of speech and noise levels and the Lombard effect in eating establishments.-J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 121: 2023-2033. (Pubitemid 46548405)
45. Hofler, H. (1984). Diagnosis of latent velopharyngeal hyperfunction by Lombard effect.-Laryngol. Rhinol. Otol. Voice 63: 596-599. (Pubitemid 15215541)
46. Howell, P. (1990). Changes in voice level caused by several forms of altered feedback in fluent speakers and stutterers.-Lang. Speech 33: 325-338.
47. Huber, J.E. (2007). Effect of cues to increase sound pressure level on respiratory kinematic patterns during connected speech.-J. Speech Lang. Hearing Res. 50: 621-634. (Pubitemid 350058588)
48. Huber, J.E. & Chandrasekaran, B. (2006). Effects of increasing sound pressure level on lip and jaw movement parameters and consistency in young adults.-J. Speech Lang. Hearing Res. 49: 1368-1379.
49. Jessen, M., Köster, O. & Gfroerer, S. (2005). Influence of vocal effort on average and variability of fundamental frequency.-Speech, Lang. Law 12: 174-213. (Pubitemid 43060553)
50. Jarvis, E.D. (2004). Brains and birdsong.-In: Nature's music (Marler, P. & Slabbekoorn, H., eds). Elsevier Science, Amsterdam, p. 226-271.
51. Junqua, J.-C. (1993). The Lombard reflex and its role on human listeners and automatic speech recognizers.-J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 93: 510-524. (Pubitemid 23117065)
52. Junqua, J.-C. (1996). The influence of acoustics on speech production: a noise-induced stress phenomenon known as the Lombard reflex.-Speech Commun. 20: 13-22. (Pubitemid 126371274)
53. Jürgens, U. (2009). The neural control of vocalization in mammals: a review.-J. Voice 23: 1-10.
54. Kim, J., Kroos, C. & Davis, C. (2010). Hearing a point-light talker: an auditory influence on a visual motion detection task.-Perception 39: 407-416.
55. Kobayasi, K. & Okanoya, K. (2003a). Context-dependent song amplitude control in Ben-galese finches.-Neuro Rep. 14: 521-524. (Pubitemid 36337963)
56. Kobayasi, K.I. & Okanoya, K. (2003b). Sex differences in amplitude regulation of distance calls in Bengalese finches, Lunchula striata var. domestica.-Anim. Biol. 53: 173-182. (Pubitemid 38256718)
57. Ladich, F. (2008). Sound communication in fishes and the influence of ambient and anthropogenic noise.-Bioacoustics 17: 35-37.
58. Lamprecht, A. (1988). Changes of voice parameters by the Lombard reflex.-Laryngol. Rhinol. Otol. Voice 67: 350-354.
59. Lane, H. & Tranel, B. (1971). Lombard sign and role of hearing in speech.-J. Speech Hearing Res. 14: 677-709.
60. Lane, H., Tranel, B. & Sisson, C. (1970). Regulation of voice communication by sensory dynamics.-J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 47: 618-624.
61. Larsen, O.N. & Dabelsteen, T. (1990). Directionality of blackbird vocalization. Implications for vocal communication and its further study.-Ornis. Scand. 21: 37-45.
62. Lengagne, T., Aubin, T., Lauga, J. & Jouventin, P. (1999). How do king penguins (Apten-odytes patagonicus) apply the mathematical theory of information to communicate in windy conditions?-Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. B: Biol. 266: 1623-1628. (Pubitemid 29417766)
63. Leonard, M.L. & Horn, A.G. (2005). Ambient noise and the design of begging signals.-Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. B: Biol. 272: 651-656. (Pubitemid 41411147)
64. Lermoyez, M. (1920). Etienne Lombard, 1869-1920.-Presse Méd. 28: 1036.
65. Lermoyez, M. (1921). Etienne Lombard (Paris, 1869-1920).-J. Laryngol. Otol. 36: 47-48.
66. Lienard, J.S. & Di Benedetto, M.G. (1999). Effect of vocal effort on spectral properties of vowels.-J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 106: 411-422.
67. Lombard, E. (1910a). Note rectificative.-Annales des Maladies de l'Oreille et du Larynx 36: 34-35.
68. Lombard, E. (1910b). A propos de la note rectificative at de la rectification.-Annales des Maladies de l'Oreille et du Larynx 36: 111-112.
69. Lombard, E. (1911). Le signe de l'élévation de la voix.-Ann. Malad. l'Oreille Larynx 37: 101-119.
70. Lombard, E. & Baldenweck, L. (1916). Traitement de quelques cas de mutité hystérotrau-matique par le procédé de la suppression de contrôle auditif de la voix (méthode de Lombard).-Arch. Méd. Pharm. Militaires 66: 501-503.
71. Lopez, P.T., Narins, P.M., Lewis, E.R. & Moore, S.W. (1988). Acoustically induced call modification in the white-lipped frog, Leptodactylus albilabris.-Anim. Behav. 36: 1295-1308.
72. Love, E.K. & Bee, M.A. (2010). An experimental test of noise-dependent voice amplitude regulation in Cope's grey treefrog, Hyla chrysoscelis.-Anim. Behav. 80: 509-515.
73. Lu, Y. & Cooke, M. (2008). Lombard speech: effects of task and noise type.-J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 123: 3072.
74. Lu, Y. & Cooke, M. (2009). Speech production modifications produced in the presence of low-pass and high-pass filtered noise.-J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 126: 1495-1499.
75. Luther, D. & Baptista, L.F. (2010). Urban noise and the cultural evolution of bird songs.-Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. B: Biol. 277: 469-473.
76. Manabe, K., Sadr, E.I. & Dooling, R.J. (1998). Control of vocal intensity in budgerigars (Melopsittacus undulatus): differential reinforcement of vocal intensity and the Lombard effect.-J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 103: 1190-1198. (Pubitemid 28087588)
77. McColl, D. & McCaffrey, P. (2006). Perception of spasmodic dysphonia speech in background noise.-Percept. Motor Skills 103: 629-635.
78. McColl, D.A. (2006). Intelligibility of tracheoesophageal speech in noise.-J. Voice 20: 605-615. (Pubitemid 44839169)
79. Moore, B.C.J. (2003). An introduction to the psychology of hearing, 5th edn.-Academic Press, London.
80. Nelson, B.S. (2000). Avian dependence on sound pressure level as an auditory distance cue.-Anim. Behav. 59: 57-67. (Pubitemid 30106794)
81. Nelson, B.S., Beckers, G.J.L. & Suthers, R.A. (2005). Vocal tract filtering and sound radiation in a songbird.-J. Exp. Biol. 208: 297-308. (Pubitemid 40307233)
82. Nemeth, E. & Brumm, H. (2010). Birds and anthropogenic noise: are urban songs adaptive?-Am. Nat. 176: 465-475.
83. Newman, R.S. (2003). Prosodic differences in mothers' speech to toddlers in quiet and noisy environments.-Appl. Psycholing. 24: 539-560. (Pubitemid 37469603)
84. Nijs, L., Saher, K. & den Ouden, D. (2008). Effect of room absorption on human vocal output in multitalker situations.-J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 123: 803-813. (Pubitemid 351208348)
85. Nonaka, S., Takahashi, R., Enomoto, K., Katada, A. & Unno, T. (1997). Lombard reflex during PAG-induced vocalization in decerebrate cats.-Neurosci. Res. 29: 283-289. (Pubitemid 28052724)
86. Ogawa, T. & Kobayashi, T. (2009). Influence of Lombard effect: accuracy analysis of simulation-based assessments of noisy speech recognition systems for various recognition conditions.-IEICE Trans. Inform. Syst. E92D: 2244-2252.
87. Osmanski, M.S. & Dooling, R.J. (2009). The effect of altered auditory feedback on control of vocal production in budgerigars (Melopsittacus undulatus).-J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 126: 911-919.
88. Parks, S.E., Johnson, M., Nowacek, D. & Tyack, P.L. (2011). Individual right whales call louder in increased environmental noise.-Biol. Lett. 7: 33-35.
89. Patel, R. & Schell, K.W. (2008). The influence of linguistic content on the Lombard effect.-J. Speech Lang. Hearing Res. 51: 209-220. (Pubitemid 351206586)
90. Patil, S.A. & Hansen, J.H.L. (2010). The physiological microphone (PMIC): a competitive alternative for speaker assessment in stress detection and speaker verification.-Speech Commun. 52: 327-340.
91. Patricelli, G.L., Dantzker, M.S. & Bradbury, J.W. (2007). Differences in acoustic directionality among vocalizations of the male red-winged blackbird (Agelaius pheoniceus) are related to function in communication.-Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 61: 1099-1110. (Pubitemid 46559562)
92. Penna, M. & Hamilton-West, C. (2007). Susceptibility of evoked vocal responses to noise exposure in a frog of the temperate austral forest.-Anim. Behav. 74: 45-56. (Pubitemid 47001331)
93. Penna, M., Pottstock, H. & Velasquez, N. (2005). Effect of natural and synthetic noise on evoked vocal responses in a frog of the temperate austral forest.-Anim. Behav. 70: 639-651. (Pubitemid 43293144)
94. Pick, H.L., Siegel, G.M., Fox, P.W., Garber, S.R. & Kearney, J.K. (1989). Inhibiting the Lombard effect.-J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 85: 894-900. (Pubitemid 19050595)
95. Pohl, N.U., Slabbekoorn, H., Klump, G.M. & Langemann, U. (2009). Effects of signal features and environmental noise on signal detection in the great tit, Parus major.-Anim. Behav. 78: 1293-1300.
96. Potash, L.M. (1972a). Noise-induced changes in calls of the Japanese quail.-Psychon. Sci. 26: 252-254.
97. Potash, L.M. (1972b). A signal detection problem and possible solution in Japanese quail (Coturnix coturnix japonica).-Anim. Behav. 20: 192-195.
98. Pytte, C.L., Rusch, K.M. & Ficken, M.S. (2003). Regulation of vocal amplitude by the blue-throated hummingbird, Lampornis clemenciae.-Anim. Behav. 66: 703-710. (Pubitemid 37284120)
99. Reisz, R.R. (1997). The origin and early evolutionary history of amniotes.-Trends Ecol. Evol. 12: 218-222.
100. Richardson, W.J., Greene, C.R., Malme, C.I. & Thomson, D.H. (1995). Marine mammals and noise.-Academic Press, San Diego, CA.
101. Rindel, J.H. (2010). Verbal communication and noise in eating establishments.-Appl. Acoust. 71: 1156-1161.
102. Ritschard, M. & Brumm, H. (2011). Song amplitude affects territorial aggression of male receivers in chaffinches.-Behav. Ecol. 22: 310-316.
103. Ritschard, M. & Brumm, H. (in press). Effects of vocal learning, phonetics and inheritance on song amplitude in zebra finches.-Anim. Behav.
104. Sadagopan, N. & Huber, J.E. (2007). Effects of loudness cues on respiration in individuals with Parkinson's disease.-Mov. Disord. 22: 651-659. (Pubitemid 46800134)
105. Salaberria, C. & Gil, D. (2010). Increase in song frequency in rersponse to urban noise in the great tit Parus major as shown by data from the Madrid (Spain) city noise map.-Ardeola 57: 3-11.
106. Sarikaya, R. & Hansen, J.H.L. (2000). High resolution speech feature parametrization for monophone-based stressed speech recognition.-IEEE Signal Process. Lett. 7: 182-185.
107. Schultzcoulon, H.J. & Fues, C.P. (1975). Lombard reflex as a voice function test.-Arch. Oto-Rhino-Laryngol. 210: 232-234.
108. Sebileau, P. (1911). Le diagnostic de la surdite simulee.-Ann. Malad. l'Oreille Larynx 37: 193-195.
109. Shannon, C.E. & Weaver, W. (1949). The mathematical theory of communication.-Illinois University Press, Urbana, IL.
110. Sibley, C.G. & Ahlquist, J.E. (1990). Phylogeny and classification of birds.-Yale University Press, New Haven, CT.
111. Sinnott, J.M., Stebbins, W.C. & Moody, D.B. (1975). Regulation of voice amplitude by the monkey.-J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 58: 412-414.
112. Slabbekoorn, H., Bouton, N., van Opzeeland, I., Coers, A., ten Cate, C. & Popper, A.N. (2010). A noisy spring: the impact of globally rising underwater sound levels on fish.-Trends Ecol. Evol. 25: 419-427.
113. Slabbekoorn, H. & den Boer-Visser, A. (2006). Cities change the songs of birds.-Curr. Biol. 16: 2326-2331. (Pubitemid 44821838)
114. Slabbekoorn, H. & Peet, M. (2003). Birds sing at a higher pitch in urban noise.-Nature 424: 267. (Pubitemid 36899357)
115. Striedter, G.F. (2005). Principles of brain evolution.-Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, MA.
116. Suthers, R.A. & Zollinger, S.A. (2004). Producing song-the vocal apparatus.-In: Behavioral neurobiology of birdsong (Zeigler, H.P. & Marler, P., eds). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, p. 109-129.
117. Tartter, V.C., Gomes, H. & Litwin, E. (1993). Some acoustic effects of listening to noise on speech production.-J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 94: 2437-2440. (Pubitemid 23307703)
118. Ternström, S., Bohman, M. & Södersten, M. (2006). Loud speech over noise: some spectral attributes, with gender differences.-J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 119: 1648-1665. (Pubitemid 43326033)
119. Titze, I. (1996). Principles of voice production.-Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
120. Tressler, J. & Smotherman, M.S. (2009). Context-dependent effects of noise on echolocation pulse characteristics in free-tailed bats.-J. Comp. Physiol. A 195: 923-934.
121. Tyack, P.L. (2008). Implications for marine mammals of large-scale changes in the marine acoustic environment.-J. Mammal. 89: 549-558. (Pubitemid 351842427)
122. Van Summers, W., Pisoni, D.B., Bernacki, R.H., Pedlow, R.I. & Stokes, M.A. (1988). Effects of noise on speech production: acoustic and perceptual analyses.-J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 84: 917-928.
123. van Tuinen, M. & Hadly, E.A. (2004). Error in estimation of rate and time inferred from the early amniote fossil record and avian molecular clocks.-J. Mol. Evol. 59: 267-276. (Pubitemid 39128349)
124. Verzijden, M.N., Ripmeester, E.A.P., Ohms, V.R., Snelderwaard, P. & Slabbekoorn, H. (2010). Immediate spectral flexibility in singing chiffchaffs during experimental exposure to highway noise.-J. Exp. Biol. 213: 2575-2581.
125. Weißing, H. (1984). Pegelgrößen.-In: Taschenbuch Akustik (Fasold, W., Kraak, W. & Schirmer, W., eds), VEB Verlag Technik, Berlin, p. 380-387.
126. Winkworth, A.L. & Davis, P.J. (1997). Speech breathing and the Lombard effect.-J. Speech Lang. Hearing Res. 40: 159-169. (Pubitemid 27317993)
127. Womack, B.D. & Hansen, J.H.L. (1999). N-channel hidden Markov models for combined stressed speech classification and recognition.-IEEE Trans. Speech Audit. Process. 7: 668-677.
128. Wood, W.E. & Yezerinac, S.M. (2006). Song sparrow (Melospiza melodia) song varies with urban noise.-Auk 123: 650-659. (Pubitemid 44106811)
129. Wooley, S.M.N. (2008). Auditory feedback and singing in adult birds.-In: Neuroscience of birdsong (Zeigler, H.P. & Marler, P., eds). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, p. 228-239.
130. Zeine, L. & Brandt, J.F. (1988). The Lombard effect on alaryngeal speech.-J. Commun. Disord. 21: 373-383.
131. Zhao, Y. & Jurafsky, D. (2009). The effect of lexical frequency and Lombard reflex on tone hyperarticulation.-J. Phonet. 37: 231-247.
132. Zollinger, S.A. & Brumm, H. (2011). The Lombard effect.-Curr. Biol. 21: R614-R615.
133. Zollinger, S.A., Goller, F. & Brumm, H. (2011). Metabolic costs of increasing song amplitude in zebra finches.-PLoS ONE 6: e23198.
134. Zwemer, J., Lenhart, A., Kim, W., Siddiqui, K.M. & Siegel, E.L. (2009). Effect of ambient sound masking on the accuracy of computerized speech recognition.-Radiology 252: 691-695.