The effect of anchors and training on the reliability of perceptual voice evaluation.

Perceptual voice evaluation is a common clinical tool for rating the severity of vocal quality impairment. However, the evaluation process involves subjective judgment, and reliability is therefore a major issue that needs to be considered. When listeners are asked to judge the quality of a voice signal, they use their own internal standards as the references. These internal standards can be variable, as different individuals may have acquired different standards in prior situations. In order to improve the reliability of the perceptual voice evaluation process, external anchors and training are provided to counteract the effect of these internal standards. This study investigated to what extent the provision of anchors and a training program would improve the reliability of perceptual voice evaluation by naive listeners. The results show, in general, that anchors and training helped to improve the reliability of perceptual voice evaluation, especially in the rating of male voices. Furthermore, it was found that anchors made up of synthesized signals combined with training were more effective in improving reliability in judging perceptual roughness and breathiness than natural voice anchors.

[1]  Effects of Perceptual Training Based upon Synthesized Voice Signals , 1996, Perceptual and motor skills.

[2]  D. Klatt,et al.  Analysis, synthesis, and perception of voice quality variations among female and male talkers. , 1990, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[3]  E. Yiu,et al.  Analysing vocal quality of connected speech using Kay's computerized speech lab: a preliminary finding , 2000 .

[4]  M. Hirano,et al.  Clinical Examination of Voice , 1981 .

[5]  Antoine Giovanni,et al.  Comparison of Different Voice Samples for Perceptual Analysis , 1999, Folia Phoniatrica et Logopaedica.

[6]  J. Kreiman,et al.  Perceptual evaluation of voice quality: review, tutorial, and a framework for future research. , 1993, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[7]  J. Sundberg,et al.  Perceptual and acoustic correlates of abnormal voice qualities. , 1980, Acta oto-laryngologica.

[8]  P. Onghena,et al.  Some issues in the statistical analysis of completely randomized and repeated measures designs for speech, language, and hearing research. , 1999, Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR.

[9]  J Kreiman,et al.  Comparing internal and external standards in voice quality judgments. , 1993, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[10]  E. Yumoto,et al.  Harmonics-to-noise ratio and psychophysical measurement of the degree of hoarseness. , 1984, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[11]  Geoffrey Hall Perceptual and associative learning , 1991 .

[12]  C L Ludlow,et al.  The use of perceptual methods by new clinicians for assessing voice quality. , 1986, The Journal of speech and hearing disorders.

[13]  Yiu Edwin M-L,et al.  Voice Problems in Hong Kong: A Preliminary Report , 1991 .

[14]  J. Kreiman,et al.  Individual differences in voice quality perception. , 1992 .

[15]  Martin J. Ball,et al.  Voice Quality Measurement , 1999 .

[16]  J. Kreiman,et al.  The multidimensional nature of pathologic vocal quality. , 1994, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[17]  E. Gibson Principles of Perceptual Learning and Development , 1969 .

[18]  H. Gilbert,et al.  Relation between voice profile ratings and aerodynamic and acoustic parameters. , 1984, Journal of communication disorders.

[19]  C. Shewell The effect of perceptual training on ability to use the Vocal Profile Analysis Scheme. , 1998, International journal of language & communication disorders.

[20]  M. P. Gelfer Perceptual attributes of voice: Development and use of rating scales , 1988 .

[21]  J. Laver The phonetic description of voice quality , 1980 .

[22]  G. Krom Some spectral correlates of pathological breathy and rough voice quality for different types of vowel fragments. , 1995, Journal of speech and hearing research.