Abstract
Purpose
The present study aimed at measuring the smoothed and non-smoothed cepstral peak prominence
(CPPS and CPP) in teachers who considered themselves to have normal voice but some
of them had laryngeal pathology. The changes of CPP, CPPS, sound pressure level (SPL)
and perceptual ratings with different voice tasks were investigated and the influence
of vocal pathology on these measures was studied.
Method
Eighty-four Finnish female primary school teachers volunteered as participants. Laryngoscopically,
52.4% of these had laryngeal changes (39.3% mild, 13.1% disordered). Sound recordings
were made for phonations of comfortable sustained vowel, comfortable speech, and speech
produced at increased loudness level as used during teaching. CPP, CPPS and SPL values
were extracted using Praat software for all three voice samples. Sound samples were also perceptually evaluated
by five voice experts for overall voice quality (10 point scale from poor to excellent)
and vocal firmness (10 point scale from breathy to pressed, with normal in the middle).
Results
The CPP, CPPS and SPL values were significantly higher for vowels than for comfortable
speech and for loud speech compared to comfortable speech (P < 0.001). Significant correlations were found between SPL and cepstral measures.
The loud speech was perceived to be firmer and have a better voice quality than comfortable
speech. No significant relationships of the laryngeal pathology status with cepstral
values, perceptual ratings, or voice SPLs were found (P > 0.05).
Conclusion
Neither the acoustic measures (CPP, CPPS, and SPL) nor the perceptual evaluations
could clearly distinguish teachers with laryngeal changes from laryngeally healthy
teachers. Considering no vocal complaints of the subjects, the data could be considered
representative of teachers with functionally healthy voice.
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 accessOne-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 VoiceAlready a print subscriber? Claim online access
Already an online subscriber? Sign in
Register: Create an account
Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect
References
- Acoustic correlates of breathy vocal quality.J Speech, Lang Hearing Res. 1994; 37: 769-778https://doi.org/10.1044/jshr.3704.769
- Acoustic correlates of breathy vocal quality: dysphonic voices and continuous speech.J Speech, Lang Hearing Res. 1996; 39: 311-321https://doi.org/10.1044/jshr.3902.311
- Objective dysphonia measures in the program praat: smoothed cepstral peak prominence and acoustic voice quality index.J Voice. 2015; 29: 35-43
- Recommended protocols for instrumental assessment of voice: American speech-language-hearing association expert panel to develop a protocol for instrumental assessment of vocal function.Am J Speech-Lang Pathol. 2018; 27: 887-905https://doi.org/10.1044/2018_AJSLP-17-0009
Heman-Ackah YD, Michael DD, Baroody MM, et al. Cepstral peak prominence: a more reliable measure of dysphonia. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol. 2003;112:324–333. https://doi.org/10.1177/000348940311200406
- The relationship between cepstral peak prominence and selected parameters of dysphonia.J Voice. 2002; 16: 20-27
- Reliability of objective voice measures of normal speaking voices.J Voice. 2013; 27: 170-176
- Quantifying dysphonia severity using a spectral/cepstral-based acoustic index: comparisons with auditory-perceptual judgements from the CAPE-V.Clin Linguist Phonetics. 2010; 24: 742-758https://doi.org/10.3109/02699206.2010.492446
Shue YL, Chen G, Alwan A. On the interdependencies between voice quality, glottal gaps, and voice-source related acoustic measures. In: Eleventh Annual Conference of the International Speech Communication Association INTERSPEECH. 2010: pp. 34–37. https://www.isca-speech.org/archive/interspeech_2010/i10_0034.html
- Acoustic correlates of dysphonia: type and severity.J Commun Disord. 1997; 30: 403-416
- Acoustic prediction of voice type in women with functional dysphonia.J Voice. 2005; 19: 268-282
- Use of spectral/cepstral analyses for differentiating normal from hypofunctional voices in sustained vowel and continuous speech contexts.J Speech, Lang Hearing Res. 2011; 54: 1525-1537https://doi.org/10.1044/1092-4388(2011/10-0209)
- Spectral-and cepstral-based acoustic features of dysphonic, strained voice quality.Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol. 2012; 121: 539-548
- Cepstrum analysis in voice disorders.Folia Phoniatr. 1995; 47: 210-217https://doi.org/10.1159/000266352
- Cepstral analysis of voice in persons with vocal nodules.J Voice. 2010; 24: 651-653
- Cepstral analysis of voice in unilateral adductor vocal fold palsy.J Voice. 2011; 25: 326-329
- Predicting voice disorder status from smoothed measures of cepstral peak prominence using praat and analysis of dysphonia in speech and voice (ADSV).J Voice. 2017; 31: 557-566
- A cepstral analysis of normal and pathologic voice qualities in Iranian adults: a comparative study.J Voice. 2017; 31: 508.e17-508.e23
- 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
- Vowel-and text-based cepstral analysis of chronic hoarseness.J Voice. 2012; 26: 416-424
- Acoustic characteristics of male commercial and public radio broadcast voices.J Voice. 2013; 27: 655.e1-655.e7
- Cepstral characteristics of voice in Indian female classical Carnatic singers.J Voice. 2015; 29: 693-695
- Voice problems at work: a challenge for occupational safety and health arrangement.Folia Phoniatr. 2000; 52: 120-125
- Classroom noise and teachers' voice production.J Speech, Lang Hearing Res. 2015; 58: 1397-1406https://doi.org/10.1044/2015_JSLHR-S-14-0248
- Four-day follow-up study on the self-reported voice condition and noise condition of teachers: relationship between vocal parameters and classroom acoustics.J Voice. 2017; 31: 120.e1-120.e8
- Teachers' voice parameters and classroom acoustics—a field study and online survey.J Acoust Soc Am. 2017; 141 (3540–3540)
- Subjective evaluation of voice and working conditions and phoniatric examination in kindergarten teachers.Folia Phoniatr. 2012; 64: 12-19
- Voice disorders in teachers and their associations with work-related factors: a systematic review.J Commun Disord. 2013; 46: 143-155
- Risk factors of voice disorders and impact of vocal hygiene awareness program among teachers in public schools in Egypt.J Voice. 2017; 31: 251.e9-251.e16
- Vocal symptoms among teachers with and without voice education.Logopedics Phoniatr Vocol. 2005; 30: 171-174
- Changes in the prevalence of vocal symptoms among teachers during a twelve-year period.J Voice. 2005; 19: 95-102
- The prevalence of voice disorders among day care center teachers compared with nurses: a questionnaire and clinical study.J Voice. 2001; 15: 413-423
- Vocal behavior and vocal loading factors for preschool teachers at work studied with binaural DAT recordings.J Voice. 2002; 16: 356-371
- Influence of noise resulting from the location and conditions of classrooms and schools in Upper Egypt on teachers' voices.J Voice. 2018;
- Difference in voice problems and noise reports between teachers of public and private schools in Upper Egypt.J Voice. 2017; 31 (508. e511–508. e516)
- Effects of vocal intensity and vowel type on cepstral analysis of voice.J Voice. 2012; 26 (670.e15–670.e20)
- Relationships between self-evaluations of voice and working conditions, background factors, and phoniatric findings in female teachers.Logopedics Phoniatr Vocol. 2009; 34: 20-31
- Guidelines for selecting microphones for human voice production research.Am J Speech-Lang Pathol. 2010; 19: 356-368https://doi.org/10.1044/1058-0360(2010/09-0091)
- Praat: Doing Phonetics by Computer.Institute of Phonetic Sciences, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands2013
- Tutorial and guidelines on measurement of sound pressure level in voice and speech.J Speech, Lang Hearing Res. 2018; 61: 441-461https://doi.org/10.1044/2017_JSLHR-S-17-0095
- Cronbach's alpha: a tool for assessing the reliability of scales.J Extension. 1999; 37: 1-5
- Auditory-perceptual evaluation of disordered voice quality.Folia Phoniatr. 2009; 61: 49-56
- Assessment of voice quality: current state-of-the-art.Auris, Nasus, Larynx. 2015; 42: 183-188
- A basic protocol for functional assessment of voice pathology, especially for investigating the efficacy of (phonosurgical) treatments and evaluating new assessment techniques.Eur Arch Oto-Rhino-Laryngol. 2001; 258: 77-82
Hillenbrand, J.S. Version 1.56 [computer program], 2006.
- A comparison of cepstral peak prominence measures from two acoustic analysis programs.J Voice. 2017; 31: 387.e1-387.e10
- A study of cepstral peak prominence characteristics in ADSV, SpeechTool and Praat.J Speech-Lang Hearing Disord. 2017; 26: 99-111
- Comparison of cepstral peak prominence measures using the ADSV, speechtool, and voice sauce acoustic analysis programs in vocally healthy female speakers.Acoust Aust. 2018; 46: 215-226
- Acoustic analyses of sustained and running voices from patients with laryngeal pathologies.J Voice. 2008; 22: 1-9
- Sustained vowels and continuous speech in the auditory-perceptual evaluation of dysphonia severity.Jornal da Sociedade Brasileira de Fonoaudiologia. 2012; 24: 107-112
- Voice loudness and gender effects on jitter and shimmer in healthy adults.J Speech, Lang Hearing Res. 2008; 51: 1152-1160https://doi.org/10.1044/1092-4388(2008/06-0208)
- Acoustic perturbation measures improve with increasing vocal intensity in individuals with and without voice disorders.J Voice. 2018; 32: 162-168
- Reliable jitter and shimmer measurements in voice clinics: the relevance of vowel, gender, vocal intensity, and fundamental frequency effects in a typical clinical task.J Voice. 2011; 25: 44-53
- The effects of frequency and intensity level on glottal closure in normal subjects.Clin Otolaryngol Allied Sci. 1996; 21: 324-327
- Toward improved ecological validity in the acoustic measurement of overall voice quality: combining continuous speech and sustained vowels.J Voice. 2010; 24: 540-555
- The exploration of an objective model for roughness with several acoustic markers.J Voice. 2018; 32: 149-161
- Quantifying the cepstral peak prominence, a measure of dysphonia.J Voice. 2014; 28: 783-788
- Acoustic-perceptual correlates of voice in Indian Hindu Purohits.J Voice. 2018;
- Comparison of rater's reliability on perceptual evaluation of different types of voice sample.J Voice. 2012; 26 (666. e613–666. e621)
Article info
Publication history
Published online: October 17, 2018
Accepted:
September 11,
2018
Identification
Copyright
© 2018 The Voice Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
