Abstract
A comparison was made between two methods of obtaining a voice range profile. One method was traditional, involving a clinician who gave instructions, motivated the subject to achieve the greatest intensity range, and determined when the goal was achieved. The second method was completely automated, involving the use of a videotape for instruction and a computer for elicitation and evaluation. Ten men and 10 women with normal voices participated as subjects in the study, and a counterbalanced design was used. Results indicated that there is no obvious preference for the use of either method, although considerable individual differences are noted.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 526-535 |
Number of pages | 10 |
Journal | Journal of Speech and Hearing Research |
Volume | 38 |
Issue number | 3 |
DOIs | |
State | Published - 1995 |
Externally published | Yes |
Keywords
- automated
- clinician assisted
- fundamental frequency
- intensity
- phonetogram
- voice range profile