TY - JOUR
T1 - Assessing vowel centralization in dysarthria
T2 - A comparison of methods
AU - Fletcher, Annalise R.
AU - McAuliffe, Megan J.
AU - Lansford, Kaitlin L.
AU - Liss, Julie
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2017 American Speech-Language-Hearing Association.
PY - 2017/2
Y1 - 2017/2
N2 - Purpose: The strength of the relationship between vowel centralization measures and perceptual ratings of dysarthria severity has varied considerably across reports. This article evaluates methods of acoustic-perceptual analysis to determine whether procedural changes can strengthen the association between these measures. Method: Sixty-one speakers (17 healthy individuals and 44 speakers with dysarthria) read a standard passage. To obtain acoustic data, 2 points of formant extraction (midpoint and articulatory point) and 2 frequency measures (Hz and Bark) were trialed. Both vowel space area and an adapted formant centralization ratio were calculated using first and second formants of speakers’ corner vowels. Twenty-eight listeners rated speech samples using different prompts: one with a focus on intelligibility, the other on speech precision. Results: Perceptually, listener ratings of speech precision provided the best index of acoustic change. Acoustically, the combined use of an articulatory-based formant extraction point, Bark frequency units, and the formant centralization ratio was most effective in explaining perceptual ratings. This combination of procedures resulted in an increase of 17% to 27% explained variance between measures. Conclusions: The procedures researchers use to assess articulatory impairment can significantly alter the strength of relationship between acoustic and perceptual measures. Procedures that maximize this relationship are recommended.
AB - Purpose: The strength of the relationship between vowel centralization measures and perceptual ratings of dysarthria severity has varied considerably across reports. This article evaluates methods of acoustic-perceptual analysis to determine whether procedural changes can strengthen the association between these measures. Method: Sixty-one speakers (17 healthy individuals and 44 speakers with dysarthria) read a standard passage. To obtain acoustic data, 2 points of formant extraction (midpoint and articulatory point) and 2 frequency measures (Hz and Bark) were trialed. Both vowel space area and an adapted formant centralization ratio were calculated using first and second formants of speakers’ corner vowels. Twenty-eight listeners rated speech samples using different prompts: one with a focus on intelligibility, the other on speech precision. Results: Perceptually, listener ratings of speech precision provided the best index of acoustic change. Acoustically, the combined use of an articulatory-based formant extraction point, Bark frequency units, and the formant centralization ratio was most effective in explaining perceptual ratings. This combination of procedures resulted in an increase of 17% to 27% explained variance between measures. Conclusions: The procedures researchers use to assess articulatory impairment can significantly alter the strength of relationship between acoustic and perceptual measures. Procedures that maximize this relationship are recommended.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85013478352&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85013478352&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1044/2016_JSLHR-S-15-0355
DO - 10.1044/2016_JSLHR-S-15-0355
M3 - Article
C2 - 28124069
AN - SCOPUS:85013478352
SN - 1092-4388
VL - 60
SP - 341
EP - 354
JO - Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research
JF - Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research
IS - 2
ER -