Abstract
Cochlear implants (CIs) provide access to auditory information that can affect vocal
control. For example, previous research shows that, when producing a sustained vowel,
CI users will alter the pitch of their voice when the feedback of their own voice
is perceived to shift. Although these results can be informative as to how perception
and production are linked for CI users, the artificial nature of the task raises questions
as to the applicability of the results to real-world vocal productions. To examine
how vocal control, when producing sustained vowels, relates to vocal control for more
ecologically valid tasks, 10 CI users’ vocal control was measured across two tasks:
(1) sustained vowel production, and (2) singing. The results found that vocal control,
as measured by the variability of the participants’ fundamental frequency, was significantly
correlated when producing sustained vowels and when singing, although variability
was significantly greater when singing. This suggests that, despite the artificial
nature of sustained vowel production, vocal control on such tasks is related to vocal
control for more ecologically valid tasks. However, the results also suggest that
vocal control may be overestimated with sustained vowel production tasks.
Key Words
Abbreviations:
CI (Cochlear implants), NH (Normal hearing)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
- Effects of simultaneous perturbations of voice pitch and loudness feedback on voice F0 and amplitude control.J Acoust Soc Am. 2007; 121: 2862-2872https://doi.org/10.1121/1.2715657
- Audio-vocal responses elicited in adult cochlear implant users.J Acoust Soc Am. 2015; 138: EL393-EL398https://doi.org/10.1121/1.4933233
- Physiological assessment of speech and voice production of adults with hearing loss.J Speech Hear Res. 1994; 37: 510-521https://doi.org/10.1044/jshr.3703.510
- The effects of cochlear implant use on voice parameters.Otolaryngol Clin North Am. 1983; 16: 281-292
- Acoustic voice analysis of prelingually deaf adults before and after cochlear implantation.J Voice. 2007; 21: 669-682https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2006.07.005
- Abnormal voicing in children using cochlear implants.Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2010; 136: 17-21https://doi.org/10.1001/archoto.2009.194
- Change of phonation control after cochlear implantation.Otol Neurotol. 2006; 27: 499-503https://doi.org/10.1097/00129492-200606000-00011
- The influence of cochlear implantation on some voice parameters.Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol. 2005; 69: 1635-1640https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijporl.2005.03.045
- PRAAT, a system for doing phonetics by computer.Glot Int. 2001; 5: 341-347https://doi.org/10.1097/AUD.0b013e31821473f7
- Voice loudness and gender effects on jitter and shimmer in healthy adults.J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2008; 51: 1152-1160https://doi.org/10.1044/1092-4388(2008/06-0208)
- Interleaved processors improve cochlear implant patients’ spectral resolution.Ear Hear. 2016; 37: e85-e90https://doi.org/10.1097/AUD.0000000000000249
- Effects of vocal training on the acoustic parameters of the singing voice.J Voice. 2003; 17: 529-543https://doi.org/10.1067/S0892-1997(03)00083-3
- Efficacy of vocal function exercises as a method of improving voice production.J Voice. 1994; 8: 271-278https://doi.org/10.1016/S0892-1997(05)80299-1
- The impact of preventive voice care programs for training teachers: a longitudinal study.J Voice. 2004; 18: 63-70https://doi.org/10.1016/S0892-1997(03)00088-2
- Training outcome in future professional voice users after 18 months of voice training.Folia Phoniatr Logop. 2004; 56: 120-129https://doi.org/10.1159/000076063
Article info
Publication history
Published online: November 14, 2018
Accepted:
October 18,
2018
Footnotes
Funding: This work was supported by funds from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
Identification
Copyright
© 2018 The Voice Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
