Comparison between clinician-assisted and fully automated procedures for obtaining a voice range profile

I. R. Titze, D. Wong, M. A. Milder, S. R. Hensley, L. O. Ramig

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

24 Scopus citations

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 languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)526-535
Number of pages10
JournalJournal of Speech and Hearing Research
Volume38
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - 1995
Externally publishedYes

Keywords

  • automated
  • clinician assisted
  • fundamental frequency
  • intensity
  • phonetogram
  • voice range profile

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Comparison between clinician-assisted and fully automated procedures for obtaining a voice range profile'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this