Abstract
IntroductionVoice disorders alter the sound signal in several ways, combining several types of vocal emission disturbances and noise. The phonatory deviation diagram is a two-dimensional chart that allows the evaluation of the vocal signal based on the combination of periodicity (jitter, shimmer, and correlation coefficient) and noise (Glottal to Noise Excitation) measurements. The use of synthesized signals, where one has a greater control and knowledge of the production conditions, may allow a better understanding of the physiological and acoustic mechanisms underlying the vocal emission and its main perceptual-auditory correlates regarding the intensity of the deviation and types of vocal quality.ObjectiveTo analyze the performance of the phonatory deviation diagram in the discrimination of the presence and degree of roughness and breathiness in synthesized voices.Methods871 synthesized vocal signals were used corresponding to the vowel /ɛ/. The perceptual-auditory analysis of the degree of roughness and breathiness of the synthesized signals was performed using visual analogue scale. Subsequently, the signals were categorized regarding the presence/absence of these parameters based on the visual analogue scale cutoff values. Acoustic analysis was performed by assessing the distribution of vocal signals according to the phonatory deviation diagram area, quadrant, shape, and density. The equality of proportions and the chi-square tests were performed to compare the variables.ResultsRough and breathy vocal signals were located predominantly outside the normal range and in the lower right quadrant of the phonatory deviation diagram. Voices with higher degrees of roughness and breathiness were located outside the area of normality in the lower right quadrant and had concentrated density.ConclusionThe normality area and the phonatory deviation diagram quadrant can discriminate healthy voices from rough and breathy ones. Voices with higher degrees of roughness and breathiness are proportionally located outside the area of normality, in the lower right quadrant and with concentrated density.
Highlights
Voice disorders alter the sound signal in several ways, combining several types of vocal emission disturbances and noise
Perceptual-auditory evaluation and acoustic analysis are the main tools used by the speech therapist/audiologist to characterize the vocal quality deviation observed in voice disorders.[3]
Considering that the identification of the presence and degree of roughness and breathiness are part of the clinical vocal evaluation routine, that Phonatory Deviation Diagram (PDD) is an important tool in the evaluation and monitoring of voice disorders, and that the use of synthesized signals allows greater control of the stimulus and can elucidate conditions underlying the perceived deviation, the aim of this research is to analyze the performance of PDD in the discrimination of the presence and degree of roughness and breathiness in synthesized voices
Summary
Voice disorders alter the sound signal in several ways, combining several types of vocal emission disturbances and noise. The use of synthesized signals, where one has a greater control and knowledge of the production conditions, may allow a better understanding of the physiological and acoustic mechanisms underlying the vocal emission and its main perceptual-auditory correlates regarding the intensity of the deviation and types of vocal quality. Objective: To analyze the performance of the phonatory deviation diagram in the discrimination of the presence and degree of roughness and breathiness in synthesized voices. The perceptual-auditory analysis of the degree of roughness and breathiness of the synthesized signals was performed using visual analogue scale. Acoustic analysis was performed by assessing the distribution of vocal signals according to the phonatory deviation diagram area, quadrant, shape, and density. The descriptors ‘‘roughness’’, ‘‘breathiness’’ and ‘‘tension’’ are universally used[4,5] to characterize dysphonic voices, showing a correlation in the physiological and acoustic planes.6---8 the roughness and breathiness parameters are considered more robust, whereas tension is a less reliable quality with great inter-rater variability, which justifies its omission in some perceptual-auditory evaluation protocols.[9,10]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
