Relative fundamental frequency (RFF) has been investigated as a possible acoustic measure to assess laryngeal tension. This study aimed to identify possible factors in RFF stimuli (stress type, vowel identity, baseline f0, and loudness) that might also affect RFF values.
Fifteen speakers with healthy voices produced short RFF stimuli (vowel-/f/-vowel; eg, /ɑfɑ/) in different conditions. They produced the stimuli with three different stress types and four different vowels. Participants also produced stimuli in three different baseline f0 conditions and three different loudness conditions. The mean RFF and within- and between-subject standard deviation (SD) of RFF were estimated for each stimuli condition.
Stress type had a statistically significant effect on RFF means and within-subject SDs with a large effect size (P < 0.001). A significant but small effect of vowel identity was observed: onset 1 RFF values from /ɑ/ were higher than onset 1 RFF values from /u/ (P < 0.01). Baseline f0 had a significant effect on RFF values with a medium effect size (P < 0.05). Loudness did not have any significant effect on RFF, but onset 1 RFF values produced with soft voice showed an unexpectedly high between-subject SD.
This evidence suggests that stress type is the most important factor to consider in RFF measurement. We also conclude that RFF may be somewhat resistant to vowel variation and small differences in baseline f0 and loudness, which may be beneficial in clinical settings.
To read this article in full you will need to make a payment
Purchase one-time access:Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
One-time access price info
- For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
- For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'
Subscribe:Subscribe to Journal of Voice
Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
Already an online subscriber? Sign in
Register: Create an account
Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect
- Perceptual evaluation of voice quality and its correlation with acoustic measurements.J Voice. 2004; 18: 299-304
- Acoustic correlates of breathy vocal quality.J Speech Hear Res. 1994; 37: 769-778
- The impact of vocal hyperfunction on relative fundamental frequency during voicing offset and onset.J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2010; 53: 1220-1226
- Fundamental frequency change during offset and onset of voicing in individuals with Parkinson disease.J Voice. 2008; 22: 178-191
- Fundamental frequency during phonetically governed devoicing in normal young and aged speakers.J Acoust Soc Am. 1998; 103: 3642-3647
- Effects of voice therapy on relative fundamental frequency during voicing offset and onset in patients with vocal hyperfunction.J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2011; 54: 1260-1266
- Exploring the clinical utility of relative fundamental frequency as an objective measure of vocal hyperfunction.J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2016; 59: 1002-1017
- The relationship between perception of vocal effort and relative fundamental frequency during voicing offset and onset.J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2012; 55: 1887-1896
- Relative fundamental frequency distinguishes between phonotraumatic and non-phonotraumatic vocal hyperfunction.J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2017; 60: 1507-1515
- Effects of Parkinson's disease on fundamental frequency variability in running speech.J Med Speech Lang Pathol. 2013; 21: 235-244
- Relative fundamental frequency during vocal onset and offset in older speakers with and without Parkinson's disease.J Acoust Soc Am. 2013; 133: 1637-1643
- Acoustic correlate of vocal effort in spasmodic dysphonia.Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol. 2013; 122: 169-176
- Effects of phonetic context on relative fundamental frequency.J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2014; 57: 1259-1267
- Validation of an algorithm for semi-automated estimation of voice relative fundamental frequency.Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol. 2017; (3489417728088)
- Perception of vocal effort and distance from the speaker on the basis of vowel utterances.Percept Psychophys. 2002; 64: 131-139
- The relationship between relative fundamental frequency and a kinematic estimate of laryngeal stiffness in healthy adults.J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2016; 59: 1283-1294
- Individual monitoring of vocal effort with relative fundamental frequency: relationships with aerodynamics and listener perception.J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2015; 58: 566-575
- The universality of intrinsic F-0 of vowels.J Phon. 1995; 23: 349-366
- Mechanics of human voice production and control.J Acoust Soc Am. 2016; 140: 2614
- The association between laryngeal pseudosulcus and laryngopharyngeal reflux.Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2002; 126: 649-652
- The Voice Handicap Index (VHI): development and validation.Am J Speech Lang Pathol. 1997; 6: 66-69
- Praat: doing phonetics by computer.2016
- Madde.2010 (Tolvan Data)
- Standard Clinical Protocols for Endoscopic, Acoustic, and Aerodynamic Voice Assessment: Recommendations from ASHA Expert Committee.(in The Annual Convention of the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association)2014 (Orlando, FL)
- Nonlinear source-filter coupling in phonation: theory.J Acoust Soc Am. 2008; 123: 2733-2749
- Acoustic perturbation measures improve with increasing vocal intensity in individuals with and without voice disorders.J Voice. 2017;
- The function of laryngeal muscles in regulating fundamental frequency and intensity of phonation.J Speech Hear Res. 1969; 12: 616-628
- Voice loudness and gender effects on jitter and shimmer in healthy adults.J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2008; 51: 1152-1160
Published online: August 02, 2018
Accepted: April 4, 2018
© 2018 The Voice Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.