Research Article| Volume 34, ISSUE 3, P305-319, May 2020

Intertext Variability of Smoothed Cepstral Peak Prominence, Methods to Control It, and Its Diagnostic Properties

Published:October 30, 2018DOI:



      This study aimed to estimate the intertext variability of smoothed cepstral peak prominence (CPPS), examine whether sound-processing techniques improved its variability and diagnostic capability, and evaluate the degree of intertext variability in detail with reference to the CPPS variabilities in sustained vowels.

      Study design

      This was a retrospective study.


      Text readings of 58 Japanese syllables were recorded from 210 speakers with different diagnoses and varying degrees of dysphonia, and were divided into six passages. Applying the sound-processing techniques to those passages, we prepared three sample types: (1) nonprocessed, (2) only-loud, and (3) only-voiced samples. The intertext CPPS variability and diagnostic properties were compared across the passages and sample types. For detailed analysis, we subsequently extracted 63 normophonic speakers who maintained constant quality in their vowel utterances to evaluate the degree of intertext CPPS variability in relation to the variabilities between repeated identical vowels and across different vowels.


      Although several combinations of passages showed moderate-to-large CPPS variabilities, those variabilities were decreased by either technique, especially the deletion of silent segments, which resulted in the best diagnostic accuracy. The degree of intertext CPPS variability for the only-voiced samples was comparable to that of the CPPS variabilities in sustained vowels.


      The sound-processing technique removing silent segments should be applied to enhance the diagnostic properties of CPPS. The additional technique of deleting unvoiced segments is worth adopting if clinicians and researchers seek to attenuate the influence of text differences in calculating CPPS values.

      Key Words

      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 to Journal of Voice
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect


        • Dejonckere PH
        • Bradley P
        • Clemente P
        • et al.
        A basic protocol for functional assessment of voice pathology, especially for investigating the efficacy of (phonosurgical) treatments and evaluating new assessment techniques. Guideline elaborated by the Committee on Phoniatrics of the European Laryngological Society (ELS).
        Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2001; 258: 77-82
        • Carding PN
        • Wilson JA
        • MacKenzie K
        • et al.
        Measuring voice outcomes: state of the science review.
        J Laryngol Otol. 2009; 123: 823-829
        • Kreiman J
        • Gerratt B
        Perceptual assessment of voice quality: past, present, and future.
        Persp Voice Voice Disord. 2010; 20: 62-67
        • American National Standards Institute
        American National Standard Bioacoustical Terminology.
        Acoustical Society of America, New York, NY2015 (ANSI S3.20-2015)
        • Ferrer CA
        • Haderlein T
        • Maryn Y
        • et al.
        Collinearity and sample coverage issues in the objective measurement of vocal quality: the case of roughness and breathiness.
        J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2018; 61: 1-24
        • Kreiman J
        • Gerratt BR
        • Kempster GB
        • et al.
        Perceptual evaluation of voice quality: review, tutorial, and a framework for future research.
        J Speech Lang Hear Res. 1993; 36: 21-40
        • Isshiki N
        • Okamura H
        • Tanabe M
        • et al.
        Differential diagnosis of hoarseness.
        Folia Phoniatr. 1969; 21: 9-19
        • Hirano M
        Psycho-acoustic evaluation of voice.
        in: Arnold GE Winckel F Wyke BD Clinical Examination of Voice. Disorders of Human Communication 5. Springer-Verlag, Vienna, Austria1981: 81-84
        • Kempster GB
        • Gerratt BR
        • Verdolini AK
        • et al.
        Consensus auditory-perceptual evaluation of voice: development of a standardized clinical protocol.
        Am J Speech Lang Pathol. 2009; 18: 124-132
        • Lieberman P
        Some acoustic measures of fundamental periodicity of normal and pathologic larynges.
        J Acoust Soc Am. 1963; 35: 344-353
        • Koike Y
        Vowel amplitude modulations in patients with laryngeal diseases.
        J Acoust Soc Am. 1969; 45: 839-844
        • Koike Y
        Application of some acoustic measures for the evaluation of laryngeal dysfunction.
        Stud Phonol. 1973; 7: 17-23
        • Kitajima K
        • Gould WJ
        Vocal shimmer in sustained phonation of normal and pathologic voice.
        Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol. 1976; 85: 377-381
        • Yumoto E
        • Gould WJ
        • Baer T
        Harmonics-to-noise ratio as an index of the degree of hoarseness.
        J Acoust Soc Am. 1982; 71: 1544-1549
        • Kasuya H
        • Ogawa S
        • Mashima K
        • et al.
        Normalized noise energy as an acoustic measure to evaluate pathologic voice.
        J Acoust Soc Am. 1986; 80: 1329-1334
        • Formby C
        • Monsen RB
        Long-term average speech spectra for normal and hearing-impaired adolescents.
        J Acoust Soc Am. 1982; 71: 196-202
        • Klatt DH
        • Klatt LC
        Analysis, synthesis, and perception of voice quality variations among female and male talkers.
        J Acoust Soc Am. 1990; 87: 820-857
        • Hillenbrand J
        • Cleveland RA
        • Erickson RL
        Acoustic correlates of breathy vocal quality.
        J Speech Hear Res. 1994; 37: 769-778
        • Hillenbrand J
        • Houde RA
        Acoustic correlates of breathy vocal quality: dysphonic voices and continuous speech.
        J Speech Hear Res. 1996; 39: 311-321
        • Kreiman J
        • Gerratt BR
        • Precoda K
        Listener experience and perception of voice quality.
        J Speech Hear Res. 1990; 33: 103-115
        • Kreiman J
        • Gerratt BR
        • Precoda K
        • et al.
        Individual differences in voice quality perception.
        J Speech Hear Res. 1992; 35: 512-520
        • Fex S
        Perceptual evaluation.
        J Voice. 1992; 6: 155-158
        • Kreiman J
        • Gerratt BR
        • Ito M
        When and why listeners disagree in voice quality assessment tasks.
        J Acoust Soc Am. 2007; 122: 2354-2364
        • Shrivastav R
        • Sapienza CM
        • Nandur V
        Application of psychometric theory to the measurement of voice quality using rating scales.
        J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2005; 48: 323-335
        • Sofranko JL
        • Prosek RA
        The effect of experience on classification of voice quality.
        J Voice. 2012; 26: 299-303
        • Lu F-L
        • Matteson S
        Speech tasks and interrater reliability in perceptual voice evaluation.
        J Voice. 2014; 28: 725-732
        • Yamaguchi H
        • Shrivastav R
        • Andrews ML
        • et al.
        A comparison of voice quality ratings made by Japanese and American listeners using the GRBAS scale.
        Folia Phoniatr Logop. 2003; 55: 147-157
        • De Bodt MS
        • Wuyts FL
        • Van de Heyning PH
        • et al.
        Test-retest study of the GRBAS scale: influence of experience and professional background on perceptual rating of voice quality.
        J Voice. 1997; 11: 74-80
        • Zhang Y
        • Jiang JJ
        Acoustic analyses of sustained and running voices from patients with laryngeal pathologies.
        J Voice. 2008; 22: 1-9
        • Parsa J
        • Jamieson DG
        Acoustic discrimination of pathological voice: sustained vowels versus continuous speech.
        J Speech Hear Res. 2001; 44: 327-339
        • Muta H
        • Baer T
        • Wagatsuma K
        • et al.
        A pitch-synchronous analysis of hoarseness in running speech.
        J Acoust Soc Am. 1988; 84: 1292-1301
        • de Krom G
        Consistency and reliability of voice quality ratings for different types of speech fragments.
        J Speech Hear Res. 1994; 37: 985-1000
        • Titze IR.
        Workshop on Acoustic Voice Analysis: Summary Statement.
        National Center for Voice and Speech, Denver, CO1995
        • Maryn Y
        • Roy N
        • De Bodt M
        • et al.
        Acoustic measurement of overall voice quality: a meta-analysis.
        J Acoust Soc Am. 2009; 126: 2619-2634
        • Barsties V
        • Latoszek B
        • Maryn Y
        • et al.
        A meta-analysis: acoustic measurement of roughness and breathiness.
        J Speech Hear Res. 2018; 61: 1-26
        • Noll AM
        Short-time spectrum and ''cepstrum'' techniques for vocal-pitch detection.
        J Acoust Soc Am. 1964; 36: 296-302
        • Noll AM
        Cepstrum pitch determination.
        J Acoust Soc Am. 1967; 41: 293-309
        • Koike Y
        Cepstrum analysis of pathologic voices.
        J Phonetics. 1986; 14: 501-507
        • Heman-Ackah YD
        • Michael DD
        • Goding GS
        The relationship between cepstral peak prominence and selected parameters of dysphonia.
        J Voice. 2002; 16: 20-27
        • Heman-Ackah YD
        • Heuer RJ
        • Michael DD
        • et al.
        Cepstral peak prominence: a more reliable measure of dysphonia.
        Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol. 2003; 112: 324-333
        • Halberstam B
        Acoustic and perceptual parameters relating to connected speech are more reliable measures of hoarseness than parameters relating to sustained vowels.
        ORL J Otorhinolaryngol Relat Spec. 2004; 66: 70-73
        • Lowell SY
        • Colton RH
        • Kelley RT
        • et al.
        Spectral- and cepstral-based measures during continuous speech: capacity to distinguish dysphonia and consistency within a speaker.
        J Voice. 2011; 25: e223-e232
        • Moers C
        • Möbius B
        • Rosanowski F
        • et al.
        Vowel- and text-based cepstral analysis of chronic hoarseness.
        J Voice. 2012; 26: 416-424
        • Lowell SY
        • Colton RH
        • Kelley RT
        • et al.
        Predictive value and discriminant capacity of cepstral- and spectral-based measures during continuous speech.
        J Voice. 2013; 27: 393-400
        • Brinca LF
        • Batista AP
        • Tavares AI
        • et al.
        Use of cepstral analyses for differentiating normal from dysphonic voices: a comparative study of connected speech versus sustained vowel in European Portuguese female speakers.
        J Voice. 2014; 28: 282-286
        • Hasanvand A
        • Salehi A
        • Ebrahimipour M
        A cepstral analysis of normal and pathologic voice qualities in Iranian adults: a comparative study.
        J Voice. 2017; 31 (508.e17–508.e23)
        • Cannito MP
        • Doiuchi M
        • Murry T
        • et al.
        Perceptual structure of adductor spasmodic dysphonia and its acoustic correlates.
        J Voice. 2012; 26 (818.e5–818.e13)
        • Jannetts S
        • Lowit A
        Cepstral analysis of hypokinetic and ataxic voices: correlations with perceptual and other acoustic measures.
        J Voice. 2014; 28: 673-680
        • Boersma P
        Praat, a system for doing phonetics by computer.
        Glot Int. 2001; 5: 341-345
        • Bough ID
        • Heuer RJ
        • Sataloff RT
        • et al.
        Intrasubject variability of objective voice measures.
        J Voice. 1996; 10: 166-174
        • Fitch JL
        Consistency of fundamental frequency and perturbation in repeated phonations of sustained vowels, reading, and connected speech.
        J Speech Hear Disord. 1990; 55: 360-363
        • Huang DZ
        • Minifie FD
        • Kasuya H
        • et al.
        Measures of vocal function during changes in vocal effort level.
        J Voice. 1995; 9: 429-438
        • Lee L
        • Stemple JC
        • Kizer M
        Consistency of acoustic and aerodynamic measures of voice production over 28 days under various testing conditions.
        J Voice. 1999; 13: 477-483
        • Horii Y
        Jitter and shimmer differences among sustained vowel phonations.
        J Speech Hear Res. 1982; 25: 12-14
        • Orlikoff RF.
        Vocal stability and vocal tract configuration: an acoustic and electroglottographic investigation.
        J Voice. 1995; 9: 173-181
        • Leong K
        • Hawkshaw MJ
        • Dentchev D
        • et al.
        Reliability of objective voice measures of normal speaking voices.
        J Voice. 2013; 27: 170-176
        • Diercks GR
        • Ojha S
        • Infusino S
        • et al.
        Consistency of voice frequency and perturbation measures in children using cepstral analyses: a movement toward increased recording stability.
        JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2013; 139: 811-816
        • Awan SN
        • Giovinco A
        • Owens J
        Effects of vocal intensity and vowel type on cepstral analysis of voice.
        J Voice. 2012; 26 (670.e15–670.e20)
        • Maryn Y
        • Corthals P
        • Van Cauwenberge P
        • et al.
        Toward improved ecological validity in the acoustic measurement of overall voice quality: combining continuous speech and sustained vowels.
        J Voice. 2010; 24: 540-555
        • Barsties B
        • Maryn Y
        External validation of the acoustic voice quality index version 03.01 with extended representativity.
        Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol. 2016; 125: 571-583
        • Hosokawa K
        • Barsties B
        • Iwahashi T
        • et al.
        Validation of the acoustic voice quality index in the Japanese language.
        J Voice. 2017; 31 (260.e1–260.e9)
        • Hosokawa K
        • Barsties v Latoszek B
        • Iwahashi T
        • et al.
        The acoustic voice quality index version 03.01 for the Japanese-speaking population.
        J Voice. 2018; (In press)
        • Barsties v. Latoszek B
        • Ulozaitė-Stanienė N
        • Maryn Y
        • et al.
        The influence of gender and age on the acoustic voice quality index and dysphonia severity index: a normative study.
        J Voice. 2018; (In press)
        • Ikui Y
        Examination—collecting information. Clinical Manual of Voice Disorders for Speech Therapists.
        in: Hirose H. ST no tame no onsei shogai shinryo manual. Interuna Publishers Inc., Tokyo, Japan2008: 13-32
        • Hosokawa K
        • Ogawa M
        • Iwahashi T
        • et al.
        Acoustic analysis using recorded samples of sustained vowels and text readings: utility of smoothed cepstral peak prominence.
        in: Proceedings of the 117th annual Meeting of the ORL Society of Japan. 2016: 587
        • Cliff N.
        Ordinal Methods for Behavioral Data Analysis.
        Psychology Press Ltd, London, UK1996
        • Romano J
        • Kromrey JD
        • Coraggio J
        • et al.
        Appropriate statistics for ordinal level data: should we really be using t-test and Cohen's d for evaluating group differences on the NSSE and other surveys?.
        in: Annual Meeting of the Florida Association of Institutional Research. 2006
        • Frey LR
        • Botan CH
        • Friedman PG
        • et al.
        Investigating Communication: An Introduction to Research Methods.
        Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ1991
        • Rouaud M.
        Probability, Statistics and Estimation: Propagation of Uncertainties in Experimental Measurement.
        Creative Commons, Mountain View, CA2017
        • Barsties B
        • Maryn Y
        The acoustic voice quality index. Toward expanded measurement of dysphonia severity in German subjects.
        HNO. 2012; 60: 715-720
        • Reynolds V
        • Buckland A
        • Bailey J
        • et al.
        Objective assessment of pediatric voice disorders with the acoustic voice quality index.
        J Voice. 2012; 26 (672.e1–672.e7)
        • Maryn Y
        • De Bodt M
        • Barsties B
        • et al.
        The value of the acoustic voice quality index as a measure of dysphonia severity in subjects speaking different languages.
        Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2014; 271: 1609-1619
        • Kankare E
        • Barsties B
        • Maryn Y
        • et al.
        A preliminary study of the acoustic voice quality index in Finnish speaking population.
        in: 11th Pan European Voice Conference, Florence, Italy2015 (August 31–September 4)
        • Maryn Y
        • Kim HT
        • Kim J
        Auditory-perceptual and acoustic methods in measuring dysphonia severity of Korean speech.
        J Voice. 2016; 30: 587-594
        • Kim G-H
        • Lee Y-W
        • Bae I-H
        • et al.
        Validation of the acoustic voice quality index in the Korean language.
        J Voice. 2018; (In press)
        • Uloza V
        • Petrauskas T
        • Padervinskis E
        • et al.
        Validation of the acoustic voice quality index in the Lithuanian language.
        J Voice. 2017; 31 (257.e1–257.e11)
        • Delgado Hernández J
        • León Gómez NM
        • Jiménez A
        • et al.
        Validation of the acoustic voice quality index version 03.01 and the acoustic breathiness index in the Spanish language.
        Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol. 2018; (In press)
        • Deshpande PS
        • Manikandan MS
        Effective glottal instant detection and electroglottographic parameter extraction for automated voice pathology assessment.
        IEEE J Biomed Health Inform. 2018; 22: 398-408
        • Haji T
        • Horiguchi S
        • Baer T
        • et al.
        Frequency and amplitude perturbation analysis of electroglottograph during sustained phonation.
        J Acoust Soc Am. 1986; 80: 58-62
        • Lin E
        • Jiang J
        • Hanson DG
        Glottographic signal perturbation in biomechanically different types of dysphonia.
        Laryngoscope. 1998; 108: 18-25
        • Jiang J
        • Lin E
        • Wang J
        • et al.
        Glottographic measures before and after levodopa treatment in Parkinson's disease.
        Laryngoscope. 1999; 109: 1287-1294
        • Hosokawa K
        • Yoshida M
        • Yoshii T
        • et al.
        Effectiveness of the computed analysis of electroglottographic signals in muscle tension dysphonia.
        Folia Phoniatr Logop. 2012; 64: 145-150
        • Hosokawa K
        • Ogawa M
        • Hashimoto M
        • et al.
        Statistical analysis of the reliability of acoustic and electroglottographic perturbation parameters for the detection of vocal roughness.
        J Voice. 2014; 28 (263.e9–263.e16)
        • Ogawa M
        • Hosokawa K
        • Yoshida M
        • et al.
        Immediate effects of humming on computed electroglottographic parameters in patients with muscle tension dysphonia.
        J Voice. 2014; 28: 733-741
        • Vlot C
        • Ogawa M
        • Hosokawa K
        • et al.
        Investigation of the immediate effects of humming on vocal fold vibration irregularity using electroglottography and high-speed laryngoscopy in patients with organic voice disorders.
        J Voice. 2017; 31: 48-56

      Linked Article