This investigation was designed to measure voice F 0 changes related to single motor unit (SMU) contractions in the cricothyroid and thyroarytenoid muscles. Four subjects (3 men and 1 woman) were recorded producing a prolonged vowel at modal pitch and loudness levels while simultaneous recordings of electromyograms (EMG) from the muscles were obtained. Voice F 0 changes unrelated to SMU firings in the muscles were eliminated using an averaging method previously described by Baer (1979). Results indicate that the time between discharge of the SMU and the peak in F 0 Change ("F 0 Latency") was variable and ranged from 5 to 20 ms for the thyroarytenoid and 6 to 75 ms for the cricothyroid muscle. Distinct oscillations in F 0 were always present in recordings from the woman subject and from the men when they phonated at higher-than-modal pitch levels. The findings are discussed in relation to SMU contraction times, biomechanics of the vocal folds, and the presence of jitter in normal voices.

Motor unit

10.1044/jshr.3004.552

Cite

Citations (52)

Oropharyngeal swallowing in normal adults of different ages

Gastroenterology (1992)

JoAnne Robbins John Hamilton Gregory L. Lof Gail B. Kempster

Bolus (digestion)

Age groups

High resolution manometry

10.1016/0016-5085(92)90013-o

Cite

Citations (657)

Perceptual Evaluation of Voice Quality

Journal of Speech Language and Hearing Research (1993)

Jody Kreiman Bruce R. Gerratt Gail B. Kempster Andrew Erman Gerald S. Berke

The reliability of listeners’ ratings of voice quality is a central issue in voice research because of the clinical primacy of such ratings and because they are the standard against which other measures are evaluated. However, an extensive literature review indicates that both intrarater and interrater reliability fluctuate greatly from study to study. Further, our own data indicate that ratings of vocal roughness vary widely across individual clinicians, with a single voice often receiving nearly the full range of possible ratings. No model or theoretical framework currently exists to explain these variations, although such a model might guide development of efficient, valid, and standardized clinical protocols for voice evaluation. We propose a theoretical framework that attributes variability in ratings to several sources (including listeners’ backgrounds and biases, the task used to gather ratings, interactions between listeners and tasks, and random error). This framework may guide development of new clinical voice and speech evaluation protocols, ultimately leading to more reliable perceptual ratings and a better understanding of the perceptual qualities of pathological voices.

Inter-Rater Reliability

10.1044/jshr.3601.21

Cite

Citations (709)

Selected Acoustic Characteristics of Pathologic and Normal Speakers

Journal of Speech Language and Hearing Research (1983)

Gail B. Kempster Doris J. Kistler

No AccessJournal of Speech, Language, and Hearing ResearchLetters to the Editor1 Mar 1983Selected Acoustic Characteristics of Pathologic and Normal SpeakersA Reanalysis Gail B. Kempster, and Doris J. Kistler Gail B. Kempster Northwestern University Google Scholar More articles by this author and Doris J. Kistler Northwestern University Google Scholar More articles by this author https://doi.org/10.1044/jshr.2601.159 SectionsAboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationTrack Citations ShareFacebookTwitterLinked In Additional Resources FiguresReferencesRelatedDetailsCited By Journal of Voice6:2 (115-126)1 Jan 1992Acoustic waveform perturbations and voice disordersJohn Laver, Steven Hiller and Janet Mackenzie Beck Volume 26Issue 1March 1983Pages: 159-160 Get Permissions Add to your Mendeley library HistoryReceived: Aug 11, 1982Accepted: Sep 20, 1982 Published in issue: Mar 1, 1983 Metrics Topicsasha-topicsCopyright & PermissionsCopyright © 1983 American Speech-Language-Hearing AssociationPDF DownloadLoading ...

Doris (gastropod)

10.1044/jshr.2601.159

Cite

Citations (2)

Consensus Auditory-Perceptual Evaluation of Voice

PsycTESTS Dataset (2009)

Gail B. Kempster Bruce R. Gerratt Katherine Verdolini Abbott Julie Barkmeier‐Kraemer Robert E. Hillman

Auditory perception

10.1037/t71599-000

Cite

Citations (12)