Listener effort for highly intelligible tracheoesophageal speech

Journal of Communication Disorders

Volumn 45, Issue 3, 2012, Pages 235-245

  Nagle, Kathy F ^a   Eadie, Tanya L ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON   (United States)

Author keywords

Listener effort; Speech acceptability; Tracheoesophageal

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; AUDITORY FEEDBACK; AUDITORY STIMULATION; CONTROLLED STUDY; ESOPHAGUS SPEECH; FEMALE; HUMAN; INTERRATER RELIABILITY; INTRARATER RELIABILITY; LANGUAGE ABILITY; MALE; SOUND INTENSITY; SPEECH ANALYSIS; SPEECH ARTICULATION; SPEECH DISCRIMINATION; SPEECH INTELLIGIBILITY; SPEECH PERCEPTION; SPEECH RATE; TRACHEOSOPHAGEAL SPEECH;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; SPEECH INTELLIGIBILITY; SPEECH PERCEPTION; SPEECH, ESOPHAGEAL; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84860008667     PISSN: 00219924     EISSN: 18737994     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jcomdis.2012.01.001     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. Anderson Gosselin P., Gagné J.-P. Older adults expend more listening effort than young adults recognizing speech in noise. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research 2011, 54:944-958. 10.1044/1092-4388(2010/10-0069).
2. ANSI ANSI S1. 1-1960, Acoustical terminology 1960, American National Standards Institute, New York.
3. Bennett S., Weinberg B. Acceptability ratings of normal, esophageal, and artificial larynx speech. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research 1973, 16:608-615.
4. Beukelman D.R., Childes J., Carrell T., Funk T., Ball L.J., Pattee G.L. Perceived attention allocation of listeners who transcribe the speech of speakers with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. Speech Communication 2011, 53:801-806. 10.1016/j.specom.2010.12.005.
5. Chan K.M., Yiu E.M. The effect of anchors and training on the reliability of perceptual voice evaluation. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research 2002, 45:111-126. 10.1044/1092-4388(2002/009).
6. Eadie T.L. The ICF: A proposed framework for comprehensive rehabilitation of individuals who use alaryngeal speech. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology 2003, 12:189-197.
7. Eadie T.L. Application of the ICF in communication after total laryngectomy. Seminars in Speech and Language 2007, 28:291-300.
8. Eadie T.L., Doyle P.C. Direct magnitude estimation and interval scaling of pleasantness and severity in dysphonic and normal speakers. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 2002, 112:3014-3021.
9. Eadie T.L., Doyle P.C. Auditory-perceptual scaling and quality of life in tracheoesophageal speakers. Laryngoscope 2004, 114:753-759.
10. Eadie T.L., Doyle P.C. Quality of life in male tracheoesophageal (TE) speakers. Journal of Rehabilitation Research and Development 2005, 42:115-124.
11. Eadie T.L., Doyle P.C., Hansen K., Beaudin P.G. Influence of speaker gender on listener judgments of tracheoesophageal speech. Journal of Voice 2008, 22:43-57. http://dx.doi.org.offcampus.lib.washington.edu/10.1016/j.jvoice.2006.08. 008.
12. Eadie T.L., Nicolici C., Baylor C., Almand K., Waugh P., Maronian N. Effect of experience on judgments of adductor spasmodic dysphonia. Annals of Otology, Rhinology and Laryngology 2007, 116:695-701.
13. Evans D., Healey E.C., Kawai N., Rowland S. Middle school students' perceptions of a peer who stutters. Journal of Fluency Disorders 2008, 33:203-219. http://dx.doi.org.offcampus.lib.washington.edu/10.1016/j.jfludis.2008.06 .002.
14. Evitts P.M., Searl J. Reaction times of normal listeners to laryngeal, alaryngeal, and synthetic speech. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research 2006, 49:1380-1390.
15. Fairbanks G. Voice and articulation drillbook 1960, Harper, New York. 2nd ed.
16. Finizia C., Lindström J., Dotevall H. Intelligibility and perceptual ratings after treatment for laryngeal cancer: Laryngectomy versus radiotherapy. Laryngoscope 1998, 108:138-143.
17. Healey E.C., Gabel R.M., Daniels D.E., Kawai N. The effects of self-disclosure and non self-disclosure of stuttering on listeners' perceptions of a person who stutters. Journal of Fluency Disorders 2007, 32:51-69. http://dx.doi.org.offcampus.lib.washington.edu/10.1016/j.jfludis.2006.12 .003.
18. Iverson-Thoburn S.K., Hayden P.A. Alaryngeal speech utilization: A survey. Journal of Medical Speech-Language Pathology 2000, 8:85-99.
19. Klasner E.R., Yorkston K.M. Speech intelligibility in ALS and HD dysarthria: The everyday listener's perspective. Journal of Medical Speech-Language Pathology 2005, 13:127-139.
20. Kreiman J., Gerratt B.R. The perceptual structure of pathologic voice quality. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 1996, 100:1787-1795.
21. Kreiman J., Gerratt B.R., Kempster G.B., Erman A., Berke G.S. Perceptual evaluation of voice quality: Review, tutorial, and a framework for future research. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research 1993, 36:21-40.
22. Kreiman J., Gerratt B.R., Precoda K., Berke G.S. Individual differences in voice quality perception. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research 1992, 35:512-520.
23. Maryn Y., Dick C., Vandenbruaene C., Vauterin T., Jacobs T. Spectral, cepstral, and multivariate exploration of tracheoesophageal voice quality in continuous speech and sustained vowels. Laryngoscope 2009, 119:2384-2394. 10.1002/lary.20620.
24. Meltzner G.S., Hillman R.E. Impact of aberrant acoustic properties on the perception of sound quality in electrolarynx speech. Journal of Speech, Language and Hearing Research 2005, 48:766-779. 10.1044/1092-4388(2005/053).
25. O'Brian S., Packman A., Onslow M., Cream A., O'Brian N., Bastock K. Is listener comfort a viable construct in stuttering research?. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research 2003, 46:503-509.
26. Pindzola R.H., Cain B.H. Acceptability ratings of tracheoesophageal speech. Laryngoscope 1988, 98:394-397.
27. Portney L., Watkins M. Foundations of clinical research: applications to practice 2000, Prentice Hall Health, Upper Saddle River. 2nd ed.
28. Rakerd B., Seitz F.P., Whearty M. Assessing the cognitive demands of speech listening for people with hearing losses. Ear & Hearing 1996, 17:97-106. Retrieved from. http://journals.lww.com/ear-hearing/pages/default.aspx.
29. Robbins J., Fisher H.B., Blom E.C., Singer M.I. A comparative acoustic study of normal, esophageal, and tracheoesophageal speech production. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders 1984, 49:202-210.
30. Searl J.P., Small L.H. Gender and masculinity-femininity ratings of tracheoesophageal speech. Journal of Communication Disorders 2002, 35:407-420.
31. Shrout P.E., Fleiss J.L. Intraclass correlations: Uses in assessing rater reliability. Psychological Bulletin 1979, 86(2):420-428.
32. Singer M.I., Blom E.D. An endoscopic technique for restoration of voice after laryngectomy. Annals of Otology, Rhinology and Laryngology 1980, 89:529-533.
33. Trudeau M.D. A comparison of the speech acceptability of good and excellent esophageal and tracheoesophageal speakers. Journal of Communication Disorders 1987, 20:41-49.
34. Trudeau M.D., Qi Y.Y. Acoustic characteristics of female tracheoesophageal speech. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders 1990, 55:244-250.
35. Whitehill T., Wong C. Contributing factors to listener effort for dysarthric speech. Journal of Medical Speech-Language Pathology 2006, 14:335-342.
36. Zekveld A.A., Kramer S.E., Festen J.M. Pupil response as an indication of effortful listening: The influence of sentence intelligibility. Ear & Hearing 2010, 31:480-490. 10.1097/AUD.0b013e3181d4f251.