The Influence of Cognitive Load on Voice Production: A Scoping Review

Abstract

<h3>Objective(s)</h3> The purpose of this review was to (a) identify and evaluate tasks used to assess changes in voice production secondary to cognitive loads of varied complexity/difficulty, (b) investigate the effects of cognitive loading on acoustic measures of voice, and (c) detect knowledge gaps to further high-quality research in understanding the role of cognition on voice production. <h3>Data Sources</h3> A systematic review was conducted using five computerized databases, additional websites, citation reviews, and author search. Published and unpublished literature from 1992 to 2022 were examined. Key words used in the search included voice, cognitive load/demand/effort/flexibility, dual task, and speech production/motor. <h3>Study Selection</h3> In total, 9 articles met criteria for inclusion: completed within 30 years, healthy adults, and native English speakers. Studies whose primary dependent variables were linguistic were included if voice acoustics (e.g., fundamental frequency, intensity) were measured and described. <h3>Data Extraction</h3> Articles were coded by the primary investigator with focus on sample size and demographics, voice acoustic measures, and type and description of cognitive tasks completed. <h3>Data Synthesis</h3> Statistical analysis was not completed secondary to nature of data extracted from literature. Review revealed the most commonly reported voice measures were fundamental frequency, intensity, and cepstral peak prominence (Cohen et al., 2015; Dromey & Bates, 2005; Macpherson et al. 2017). Cognitive load tasks were varied and frequently consisted of selective attention or dual tasks including a linguistic and nonlinguistic visuomotor task. For example, sentence level stroop tasks (Abur et al., 2021; Dahl & Stepp, 2021; Macpherson et al., 2017) and complex span recall while reading (Heaton et al. 2020). <h3>Conclusions</h3> Existing literature on the influence of cognitive load on voice production is limited and results are varied. Limitations include inconsistencies in task type, acoustic measures, and measurement of individual reaction to cognitive load changes. Further research is needed to examine how increased cognitive load affects voice production with implications for clinical voice rehabilitation. <h3>Author(s) Disclosures</h3> Mary Pyfrom, MA, CCC-SLP, MT-BC: Receives salary from University of South Florida Supraja Anand, PhD: Receives salary from University of South Florida