Effects of Masking Noise on Laryngeal Resistance for Breathy, Normal, and Pressed Voice PurposeThe purpose of the present study was to explore the effects of masking noise on laryngeal resistance for breathy, normal, and pressed voice in vocally trained women.MethodEighteen vocally trained women produced breathy, normal, and pressed voice across 7 fundamental frequencies during a repeated CV utterance of /pi/ under normal and ... Article
Article  |   August 01, 2010
Effects of Masking Noise on Laryngeal Resistance for Breathy, Normal, and Pressed Voice
 
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Elizabeth U. Grillo
    West Chester University, West Chester, PA
  • Katherine Verdolini Abbott
    University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA
  • Timothy D. Lee
    McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
  • Contact author: Elizabeth U. Grillo, Department of Communicative Disorders, West Chester University, 201 Carter Drive, Office 416, West Chester, PA 19383. E-mail: egrillo@wcupa.edu.
Article Information
Speech, Voice & Prosody / Speech
Article   |   August 01, 2010
Effects of Masking Noise on Laryngeal Resistance for Breathy, Normal, and Pressed Voice
Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, August 2010, Vol. 53, 850-861. doi:10.1044/1092-4388(2009/08-0069)
History: Received March 28, 2008 , Accepted November 17, 2009
 
Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, August 2010, Vol. 53, 850-861. doi:10.1044/1092-4388(2009/08-0069)
History: Received March 28, 2008; Accepted November 17, 2009
Web of Science® Times Cited: 4

PurposeThe purpose of the present study was to explore the effects of masking noise on laryngeal resistance for breathy, normal, and pressed voice in vocally trained women.

MethodEighteen vocally trained women produced breathy, normal, and pressed voice across 7 fundamental frequencies during a repeated CV utterance of /pi/ under normal and masked auditory feedback. Dependent variables were mean and standard deviation of laryngeal resistance (LR; cmH2O/l/s).

ResultsLR values for breathy and normal voice remained constant across normal and masked auditory feedback, whereas LR values for pressed voice increased significantly from normal to masked auditory feedback.

ConclusionsThe results suggest that both voice pattern and feedback condition influenced the stability of the LR data. Specifically, the pressed voice pattern may be more susceptible to auditory feedback influence because it was less stable than the breathy and the normal voice patterns. Future investigation should continue to explore the relevance of auditory feedback for theoretical and clinical issues surrounding voice.

Acknowledgments
This study was partially supported by the second author’s R01 Grant DC005643 from the National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders and by the School of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences Development Fund at the University of Pittsburgh. We thank Neil Szuminsky for designing the hardware and software program for data collection and analysis and Elaine Rubinstein and David Bolton for help with statistical analysis.
Order a Subscription
Pay Per View
Entire Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research content & archive
24-hour access
This Article
24-hour access