Template for a 48”x36” poster

Misericordia University Printing Services

Acoustic and Aerodynamic Differences in Voicing ParametersCari M. Tellis, Ph.D., CCC/SLP, Ashley Zimmerman, Victoria Flormann, Jeanette Perucca, Misericordia University, Dallas,

Pennsylvania Speech-Language Pathology Department

AbstractObjectives:

The purpose of this study was to (1) collect acoustic, aerodynamic, and electroglottographic normative data on the figure conditions, (2) compare trained and naïve individuals.Background:

• There is no current research on the effects of physiological changes of the vocal mechanism on the acoustic and aerodynamic parameters of voicing.

• Speech pathologists strive to use evidence-based practice when working with clients; therefore research on this topic is needed to provide clinicians with the knowledge necessary to practice effectively

Methods:• Within subjects repeated measure design• 15 female graduate students • 11 male and female trained participants • Data was analyzed with descriptive statistics, one-

way analysis of variance, discriminant analysis, and two-way analysis of variance (trained versus untrained)

Procedures:• Participants said /pi/ 5 times with the PAS mask,

removed mask and held a sixth /pi/ for 3 seconds into mic

• Participant followed same protocol for all figure conditions and qualities included in the study to gather acoustic, aerodynamic, and electroglottographic data for each

• Productions were cross analyzed with spectrogram• Discriminant analysis determined predictive

variables for conditions of the following figures: Onsets of Sound, False Vocal Folds, True Vocal Fold Body Cover Condition, Thyroid Tilt, Cricoid Tilt, Head and Neck Anchor, Torso Anchor, and all Qualities.

Results:• There are acoustic, aerodynamic, and

electroglottographic differences in the various figures and conditions

• Trained and untrained participants were able to produce similar outputs for the various figures and conditions

• Perceptual correlates were able to be detected for specific figure conditions (i.e. stiff TVFBC, cricoid tilt, etc.)

.

RESULTSFALSE VOCAL FOLDS:

Constrict FVF: outside normal limits for all acoustic parameters, mean peak air pressure and jitter were

predictive variables

TRUE VOCAL FOLD BODY COVER:

Predictive Variables• For stiff TVFBC: Peak expiratory airflow• For Thick TVFBC: Sound pressure level• For Slack TVFBC: Shimmer

THYROID TILTPredictive Variables• For tilted thyroid: EGG pattern and RAPTraining Effect for F0:• Untrained group increased their pitch for tilt, while trained group kept pitch relatively stable

CRICOID TILT:

Predictive Variables• mean peak air pressure: indicating increase in sound

pressure level for cricoid tilt• Mean EGG: an increased close phase for cricoid tilt• Sound pressure level: cricoid tilt is louder

QUALITIES:• Mean SPL was significant for Belt and Cry: Belt

being loudest, and Cry being most quiet• Mean Peak Air Pressure was significant for Belt and

Sob: Belt being highest, Sob being lowest• Mean Airflow and Jitter were significant for Falsetto• Falsetto (43) and Belt (47) displayed variables

suggesting they are easiest to discriminate• Belt will be discriminated by high SPL

(loudness), and Falsetto will be discriminated by high airflow (breathiness)

DISCUSSIONThere are benefits to using specific terminology. It enables treatment and diagnosis to be consistent as well as allows for the creation of clearly defined and labeled therapy goals. This creates a better understanding of treatment for both the client and the clinician.

CONCLUSIONS Some filter specific physiologic changes (velum,

larynx position, etc.) did not show significant differences

There are potential perceptual correlates for some of the figure conditions that determine what a listener uses to discriminate between different vocal qualities

Support the potential to use Estill as a physiologically based terminology system

Possible that untrained participants can be instructed briefly on Estill figures and conditions and produce them at a level at or near that of trained professionals

Supports our hypotheses that there would be acoustic, aerodynamic, and electroglottographic differences in the various figures and conditionsLIMITATIONS and NEED FOR FUTURE

RESEARCH There is no normative data and limited research on the

differences in the acoustic, aerodynamic, and electroglottographic parameters used to produce different vocal qualities

It will be important to continue to study the acoustic, aerodynamic, and electroglottographic properties of the figures in more trained and untrained individuals, as this study was performed with a small sample size

More research needs to be done to determine the predictive variables and significant parameters of each figure condition

Current research is being conducted to on the figure conditions and whether basic Estill training improves vocal quality and/or quality of life measures related to the voices of college-age graduate students

Current research is also being conducted to examine whether naïve listeners can perceptually differentiate between the four different TVFBC conditions when rating them on a same-different continuum

Constrict FVF

Mid FVF

SLACK THICK THIN STIFF

All correspondences should be made to:Cari M. Tellis, Ph.D.Associate ProfessorSpeech-Language Pathology Department100 Lake StreetDallas, PA 18612Email: ctellis@misericordia.eduTelephone: 570-674-6207Fax: 570-255-3375

Peak Expiratory Airflow Sound Pressure Level

VERTICAL TILT

Fundamental Frequency

MEAN AIRFLOW MEAN SPL

CONSTRICT MID RETRACT

SLACKTHIC

KTHIN

STIFFSLACK

SLACKTHIC

KTHIN

STIFF

TrainedUntrained

TrainedUntrained

TrainedUntrained

SPEECH

FALSETTOCRY

SOB

TWANGBELT

SPEECH

FALSETTOCRY

SOBTWANG

BELT

TrainedUntrained

TrainedUntrained