View in EDS PDF Full Text

The Impact of Communication Modality on Voice Production.

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: The Impact of Communication Modality on Voice Production.
Authors: Tracy, Lauren F.1 lauren.tracy@bmc.org, Segin, Roxanne K.1,2, Cadiz, Manuel Diaz2, Stepp, Cara E.1,2,3
Source: Journal of Speech, Language & Hearing Research. Sep2020, Vol. 63 Issue 9, p2913-2920. 8p. 2 Charts, 1 Graph.
Subject Terms: *Audiovisual materials, *Audiometry, *Communication, *Statistical correlation, *Hearing, *Voice disorders, *Data analysis, Communication & technology, Voice analysis, Telecommunication, Audio equipment, Visual analog scale, Cepstrum analysis (Mechanics), Voice disorder treatment methodology, Analysis of variance, English language, Graphical user interfaces, Medical screening, Pocket computers, Research evaluation, Research funding, Sound, Physiological aspects of speech, Statistics, Transducers, Videoconferencing, Human voice, Mobile apps, Descriptive statistics
Abstract: Purpose: Communicating remotely using audio and audiovisual technology is ubiquitous in modern work and social environments. Remote communication is increasing in medicine and in voice therapy delivery, and this evolution may have an impact on speakers’ voices. This study sought to determine whether these communication modalities impact the voice production of typical speakers. Method: The speech acoustics of 12 participants with healthy voices were recorded as they held standardized conversations with a single investigator using three communication modalities: in-person, remote-audio, and remote-audiovisual. Participants rated their vocal effort on a 100-mm visual analog scale. Results: Compared to in-person communication, self-ratings of vocal effort were statistically significantly increased for remote-audiovisual communication; vocal effort during remote-audio and in-person communication were not significantly different. In comparison to in-person communication, vocal intensity and smoothed cepstral peak prominence (CPPS) were statistically significantly higher during remote-audio and remote-audiovisual communication. Effect sizes for CPPS changes were larger than for sound pressure level (SPL), and changes in CPPS and SPL between in-person and remote-audiovisual communication were not significantly correlated. Conclusions: Vocal effort and SPL were increased when using remote-audio and remote-audiovisual communication in comparison to in-person communication. Voice quality was also impacted by technology use, with changes in CPPS that were consistent with, but not fully explained by, increases in SPL. This may impact the telepractice delivery of voice therapy, and further investigation is warranted. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
Copyright of Journal of Speech, Language & Hearing Research is the property of American Speech-Language-Hearing Association and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
Database: Education Research Complete
Description
Abstract:Purpose: Communicating remotely using audio and audiovisual technology is ubiquitous in modern work and social environments. Remote communication is increasing in medicine and in voice therapy delivery, and this evolution may have an impact on speakers’ voices. This study sought to determine whether these communication modalities impact the voice production of typical speakers. Method: The speech acoustics of 12 participants with healthy voices were recorded as they held standardized conversations with a single investigator using three communication modalities: in-person, remote-audio, and remote-audiovisual. Participants rated their vocal effort on a 100-mm visual analog scale. Results: Compared to in-person communication, self-ratings of vocal effort were statistically significantly increased for remote-audiovisual communication; vocal effort during remote-audio and in-person communication were not significantly different. In comparison to in-person communication, vocal intensity and smoothed cepstral peak prominence (CPPS) were statistically significantly higher during remote-audio and remote-audiovisual communication. Effect sizes for CPPS changes were larger than for sound pressure level (SPL), and changes in CPPS and SPL between in-person and remote-audiovisual communication were not significantly correlated. Conclusions: Vocal effort and SPL were increased when using remote-audio and remote-audiovisual communication in comparison to in-person communication. Voice quality was also impacted by technology use, with changes in CPPS that were consistent with, but not fully explained by, increases in SPL. This may impact the telepractice delivery of voice therapy, and further investigation is warranted. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
ISSN:10924388
DOI:10.1044/2020_JSLHR-20-00161