1. Template for a 48”x36” poster
Misericordia University Printing Services
Acoustic and Aerodynamic Differences in Voicing Parameters
Cari M. Tellis, Ph.D., CCC/SLP, Ashley Zimmerman, Victoria Flormann, Jeanette Perucca, Misericordia University, Dallas,
Pennsylvania Speech-Language Pathology Department
Abstract
Objectives:
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.)
.
RESULTS
FALSE 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 TILT
Predictive Variables
• For tilted thyroid: EGG
pattern and RAP
Training 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)
DISCUSSION
There 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 conditions
LIMITATIONS 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
SLACK THICK THIN STIFF
All correspondences should be made to:
Cari M. Tellis, Ph.D.
Associate Professor
Speech-Language Pathology Department
100 Lake Street
Dallas, PA 18612
Email: ctellis@misericordia.edu
Telephone: 570-674-6207
Fax: 570-255-3375
Peak Expiratory Airflow Sound Pressure Level
VERTICAL TILT
Fundamental Frequency
MEAN AIRFLOW MEAN SPL
CONSTRICT MID RETRACT
Trained
Untrained
Trained
Untrained
Trained
Untrained
Trained
Untrained
Trained
Untrained