Summary
Objective
Dysphonia is a reduction in vocal quality that impacts communication and is often
an early sign of a voice disorder. There is little information regarding the effects
of auditory feedback control of loudness and pitch on voice quality. In this study,
we used both loudness-shift and pitch-shift paradigms to study the relationship between
auditory feedback control and vocal quality as measured by smoothed cepstral peak
prominence (CPPS), which reflects the harmonicity of the voice signal.
Study Design
Experimental, mixed design.
Methods
We applied 200 ms loudness-shifts (± 0, 3, or 6 dB) and pitch-shifts (± 0, 50, and
100 cents) to auditory feedback during sustained vowel production in 25 healthy adults.
We then measured CPPS before and after the loudness-shift or pitch-shift to investigate
the effect of changes in auditory feedback on vocal harmonicity.
Results & Conclusions
Results showed that, on average, CPPS significantly decreased between the first half
of the measured segment and the last half of the segment in the absence of auditory
feedback shifts, suggesting that voice quality may be reduced across longer vowels
over time. Upward and downward shifts in loudness auditory feedback caused a relative
increase in CPPS, indicating an improvement in vocal harmonicity, even in cases when
vocal intensity was reduced. Pitch alterations had inconsistent and minimal effects.
We propose that there may be a control mechanism for voice quality that increases
harmonicity of the voice signal to improve voice audibility (ie, ability to be heard)
in the presence of unpredictable variability in voice intensity.
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
- Consensus auditory-perceptual evaluation of voice: development of a standardized clinical protocol.Am J Speech Lang Pathol. 2009; 18: 124-132https://doi.org/10.1044/1058-0360(2008/08-0017)
- Clinical practice guideline: hoarseness (dysphonia) (update).Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2018; 158: S1-S42https://doi.org/10.1177/0194599817751030
- Efficacy of intensive phonatory-respiratory treatment (LSVT) for presbyphonia: two case reports.J Voice. 2013; 27: 786.e11-786.e23https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2013.06.006
- Phonation resistance training exercise (PhoRTE) therapy.Exercises for Voice Therapy. 2nd ed. Plural Publishing, 2013: 147-148
- The development of conversation training therapy: a concept paper.J Voice. 2016; 30: 563-573https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2015.06.007
- Voice F0 responses to manipulations in pitch feedback.J Acoust Soc Am. 1998; 103: 3153-3161https://doi.org/10.1121/1.423073
- Auditory feedback in the regulation of voice.J Acoust Soc Am. 1974; 56: 1618-1624https://doi.org/10.1121/1.1903486
- Sensory processing: advances in understanding structure and function of pitch-shifted auditory feedback in voice control.AIMS Neurosci. 2016; 3: 22-39https://doi.org/10.3934/Neuroscience.2016.1.22
- 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
- Discriminating harmonicity.J Acoust Soc Am. 2003; 114: 967-977https://doi.org/10.1121/1.1587734
- The impact of nasalance on cepstral peak prominence and harmonics-to-noise ratio: impact of nasalance on CPP.Laryngoscope. 2019; 129: E299-E304https://doi.org/10.1002/lary.27685
- Vocal responses to unanticipated perturbations in voice loudness feedback: an automatic mechanism for stabilizing voice amplitude.J Acoust Soc Am. 2006; 119: 2363-2371https://doi.org/10.1121/1.2173513
- Opposing and following vocal responses to pitch-shifted auditory feedback: evidence for different mechanisms of voice pitch control.J Acoust Soc Am. 2012; 132: 2468-2477https://doi.org/10.1121/1.4746984
- Instructing subjects to make a voluntary response reveals the presence of two components to the audio-vocal reflex.Exp Brain Res. 2000; 130: 133-141https://doi.org/10.1007/s002219900237
- Effects of vocal intensity and vowel type on cepstral analysis of voice.J Voice. 2012; 26: 670.e15-670.e20https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2011.12.001
- Toward the development of an objective index of dysphonia severity: a four‐factor acoustic model.Clin. Linguist. Phon. 2006; 20: 35-49https://doi.org/10.1080/02699200400008353
- Acoustic correlates of breathy vocal quality: dysphonic voices and continuous speech.J Speech Lang Hear Res. 1996; 39: 311-321https://doi.org/10.1044/jshr.3902.311
- Acoustic measurement of overall voice quality: a meta-analysis.J Acoust Soc Am. 2009; 126: 2619-2634https://doi.org/10.1121/1.3224706
- Cepstral measures in the assessment of severity of voice disorders.CoDAS. 2019; 31https://doi.org/10.1590/2317-1782/20182018175
- The cepstrum: a guide to processing.Proc of the IEEE. 1977; 65: 1428-1443https://doi.org/10.1109/PROC.1977.10747
- Effects of fundamental frequency, vocal intensity, sample duration, and vowel context in cepstral and spectral measures of dysphonic voices.J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2020; 63: 1326-1339https://doi.org/10.1044/2020_JSLHR-19-00049
- Quantifying dysphonia severity using a spectral/cepstral-based acoustic index: comparisons with auditory-perceptual judgements from the CAPE-V.Clin. Linguist. Phon. 2010; 24: 742-758https://doi.org/10.3109/02699206.2010.492446
- Acoustic and perceptual classification of within-sample normal, intermittently dysphonic, and consistently dysphonic voice types.J Voice. 2017; 31: 218-228https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2016.04.016
Hilger A, Levant S, Kim J, et al. Auditory feedback control of vocal intensity during speech and sustained-vowel production. Published online In Preparation.
Garrett R. Cepstral- and spectral-based acoustic measures of normal voices. Published online 2013. Available at: https://dc.uwm.edu/etd/217. Accessed June 21, 2020
- Laryngeal Electromyography.Third ed. Plural Publishing, 2017
- Laryngeal Function and Voice Disorders: Basic Science to Clinical Practice.Thieme, 2019
- The function of laryngeal muscles in regulating fundamental frequency and intensity of phonation.J Speech Hear Res. 1969; 12: 616-628https://doi.org/10.1044/jshr.1203.616
- Laryngeal electromyographic responses to perturbations in voice pitch auditory feedback.J Acoust Soc Am. 2011; 129: 3946-3954https://doi.org/10.1121/1.3575593
- Simulated effects of cricothyroid and thyroarytenoid muscle activation on adult-male vocal fold vibration.J Acoust Soc Am. 2006; 120: 386-397https://doi.org/10.1121/1.2204442
- Anatomy & Physiology for Speech, Language, and Hearing.4th ed. Cengage Learning, Delmar2010
- Influence and interactions of laryngeal adductors and cricothyroid muscles on fundamental frequency and glottal posture control.J Acoust Soc Am. 2014; 135: 2052-2064https://doi.org/10.1121/1.4865918
- Compensatory responses to loudness-shifted voice feedback during production of Mandarin speech.J Acoust Soc Am. 2007; 122: 2405-2412https://doi.org/10.1121/1.2773955
American Speech-Language-Hearing Association. Guidelines for manual pure-tone threshold audiometry [Guidelines]. 2005. Available at: www.asha.org/policy. Accessed June 8, 2020
- Auditory-motor perturbations of voice fundamental frequency: feedback delay and amplification.J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2020; 63: 2846-2860https://doi.org/10.1044/2020_JSLHR-19-00407
- It's about time: minimizing hardware and software latencies in speech research with real-time auditory feedback.J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2020; 63: 2522-2534https://doi.org/10.1044/2020_JSLHR-19-00419
- The predictability of frequency‐altered auditory feedback changes the weighting of feedback and feedforward input for speech motor control.Eur J Neurosci. 2014; 40: 3793-3806
- Audio-vocal responses to repetitive pitch-shift stimulation during a sustained vocalization: improvements in methodology for the pitch-shifting technique.J Acoust Soc Am. 2003; 114: 1048-1054https://doi.org/10.1121/1.1592161
P Boersma, D Weenink. Praat: doing phonetics by computer. 2016. Available at: http://www.praat.org/. Accessed June 6, 2020
- Objective dysphonia measures in the program Praat: smoothed cepstral peak prominence and acoustic voice quality index.J Voice. 2015; 29: 35-43https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2014.06.015
- An examination of variations in the cepstral spectral index of dysphonia across a single breath group in connected speech.J Voice. 2015; 29: 26-34https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2014.04.012
- RStudio: Integrated Development for R. RStudio.PBC, 2015 (Available at:)
- lme4: linear mixed-effects models using Eigen and S4.R package version. 2014; 1: 1-23
- lmerTest package: tests in linear mixed effects models.Journal of Statistical Software. 2017; 82https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v082.i13
Lenth R, Buerkner P, Herve M, Love J, Riebl H, Singmann H. Emmeans: Estimated Marginal Means, Aka Least-Squares Means.; 2020. Available at: https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=emmeans. Accessed August 1, 2020
- Cepstral peak prominence values for clinical voice evaluation.Am J Speech Lang Pathol. 2020; 29: 1596-1607https://doi.org/10.1044/2020_AJSLP-20-00001
- Differential effects of perturbation direction and magnitude on the neural processing of voice pitch feedback.Clin Neurophysiol. 2011; 122: 951-957https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clinph.2010.08.010
- Le signe de l’élévation de la voix.Annales des Maladies de l'Oreille, du Larynx du Nez et du Pharynx. 1911; 37: 101-119
- Acoustic changes in the production of lexical stress during Lombard speech.Lang Speech. 2014; 57: 149-162https://doi.org/10.1177/0023830913495652
- The influence of selected masking noises on Lombard and sidetone amplification effects.J Speech Hear Res. 1976; 19: 523-535https://doi.org/10.1044/jshr.1903.523
- Effects of noise on speech production: acoustic and perceptual analyses.J Acoust Soc Am. 1988; 84: 917-928
- Effects of masking noise on laryngeal resistance for breathy, normal, and pressed voice.J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2010; 53https://doi.org/10.1044/1092-4388(2009/08-0069)
- Can the Lombard effect be used to improve low voice intensity in Parkinson's disease?.Int J Lang Commun Disord. 1992; 27: 121-127https://doi.org/10.3109/13682829209012034
- Increased vocal intensity due to the Lombard effect in speakers with Parkinson's disease: simultaneous laryngeal and respiratory strategies.J Commun Disord. 2014; 48: 1-17https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcomdis.2013.12.001
- The evolution of the Lombard effect: 100 years of psychoacoustic research.Behaviour. 2011; 148: 1173-1198https://doi.org/10.1163/000579511X605759
- Use of the Lombard response in cases of hysterical aphonia.Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1975; 101 (557-557)https://doi.org/10.1001/archotol.1975.00780380035008
- Treating functional aphonia: a case study.Int J Health Sci Res. 2020; 10: 107-110
- Relationship between masking levels and phonatory stability in normal-speaking women.J Voice. 2006; 20: 223-228https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2005.04.004
- Significance of auditory and kinesthetic feedback to singers’ pitch control.J Voice. 2002; 16: 44-51https://doi.org/10.1016/S0892-1997(02)00071-1
- Comparison of vocal vibration-dose measures for potential-damage risk criteria.J Acoust Soc Am. 2015; 141: 1425-1439https://doi.org/10.1044/2015_JSLHR-S-13-0128
- Current and emerging concepts in muscle tension dysphonia: a 30-month review.J Voice. 2005; 19: 261-267https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2004.03.007
- Pathophysiology and treatment of muscle tension dysphonia: a review of the current knowledge.J Voice. 2011; 25: 202-207https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2009.10.009
- Pitch performance in singing without auditory feedback.J Acoust Soc Am. 1975; 58 (S116-S116)https://doi.org/10.1121/1.2001882
- Interactions between auditory and somatosensory feedback for voice F 0 control.Exp Brain Res. 2008; 187: 613-621https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-008-1330-z
- Resonant voice.Exercises for Voice Therapy. 2nd ed. Plural Publishing, 2013: 67-68
- Principles of skill acquisition applied to voice training.The Vocal Vision: Views on Voice by 24 Leading Teachers, Coaches and Directors. Applause Books, 2000: 65-80
- Aging and sex influence cortical auditory-motor integration for speech control.Front Neurosci. 2018; 12https://doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2018.00749
Article info
Publication history
Published online: November 13, 2020
Accepted:
November 2,
2020
Footnotes
Declarations of interest: None.
Funding was provided by Northwestern University. The funding source had no involvement in the study design; in the collection, analysis and interpretation of data; in the writing of the report; or in the decision to submit the article for publication.
Identification
Copyright
© 2020 The Voice Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
