• Volume/Page
  • Keyword
  • DOI
  • Citation
  • Advanced
   
 
 
 
Journal of the Acoustical Society of America / Volume 131 / Issue 2 / JASA EXPRESS LETTERS

Evidence of cue use and performance differences in deciphering dysarthric speech

J. Acoust. Soc. Am. Volume 131, Issue 2, pp. EL112-EL118 (2012); (7 pages)

Yu-kyong Choe1, Julie M. Liss2, Tamiko Azuma2, and Pamela Mathy3

1Department of Communication Disorders, University of Massachusetts Amherst, 358 North Pleasant, Amherst, Massachusetts 01003 ychoe@comdis.umass.edu
2Department of Speech and Hearing Science, Arizona State University, P.O. Box 870102, Tempe, Arizona 85287 julie.liss@asu.edu, tamiko.azuma@asu.edu
3Center for Autism and Related Disorders, Kennedy Krieger Institute, 3901 Greenspring Avenue, Baltimore, Maryland 21211 mathy@kennedykrieger.org

Full Text: Read Online (HTML) | Download PDF FREE | View Cart
There is substantial performance variability among listeners who transcribe degraded speech. Error patterns from 88 listeners who transcribed dysarthric speech were examined to identify differential use of syllabic strength cues for lexical segmentation. Transcripts from listeners were divided into four groups (ranging from Better- to Poorer- performing). Phrases classified as Higher- and Lower-intelligibility were analyzed separately for each performance group to assess the independent variable of severity. Results revealed that all four listener groups used syllabic strength cues for lexical segmentation of Higher-intelligibility speech, but only the Poorer listeners persisted with this strategy for the Lower-intelligibility phrases. This finding and additional analyses suggest testable hypotheses to address the role of cue-use and performance patterns.

© 2012 Acoustical Society of America

Acknowledgments

This research was supported by NIH NIDCD Grant No. 5R01 DC6859 (J.M.L.).

Article Outline

  1. Introduction
  2. Method
    1. Stimuli
    2. Participants
    3. Procedure
    4. Error coding
    5. Reliability
    6. Analysis
  3. Results and discussion

RELATED DATABASES

Web of Science

View this record in Web of Science

View Web of Science related articles

KEYWORDS and PACS

Keywords

speech, speech intelligibility

PACS

  • 43.71.Gv

    Measures of speech perception (intelligibility and quality)

  • 43.71.Bp

    Perception of voice and talker characteristics

  • 43.71.Sy

    Spoken language processing by humans

ARTICLE DATA

History
Received 15 Sep 2011
Accepted 07 Dec 2011
Published online 13 Jan 2012
Digital Object Identifier
http://dx.doi.org/10.1121/1.3674990

PUBLICATION DATA

ISSN

0001-4966 (print)  

Publisher

$abstract.society.value is a Member of CrossRef Acoustical Society of America

  1. Choe, Y. (2009). “Individual differences in understanding speech,” Diss. Abstr. Int., B 69(7), 4134JASMAN000122000001000418000001. [MEDLINE]
  2. Cutler, A., and Butterfield, S. (1992). “Rhythmic cues to speech segmentation: evidence from juncture misperception,” J. Mem. Lang. 31, 218–236.
  3. Cutler, A., and Carter, D. M. (1987). “The predominance of strong initial syllables in the English vocabulary,” Comput. Speech Lang. 2, 133–142.
  4. Duffy, J. R. (2005). Motor Speech Disorders 2nd ed. (Elsevier, New York).
  5. Hillenbrand, J. M. and Gayvert, R. T. (2005). “Open source software for experiment design and control,” J. Speech Lang. Hear. Res. 48, 45–60.
  6. Kidd, G. R., Watson, C. S., and Gygi, B. (2007). “Individual differences in auditory abilities,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 122(1), 418–435.
  7. Liss, J. M., Spitzer, S. M., Caviness, J. N., and Adler, C. (2002). “The effect of familiarization on intelligibility and lexical segmentation in hypokinetic and ataxic dysarthria,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 112(6), 3022–3030.
  8. Liss, J. M., Spitzer, S. M., Caviness, J. N., Adler, C., and Edwards, B. W. (1998) “Syllabic strength and lexical boundary decisions in the perception of hypokinetic dysarthric speech,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 104(4), 2457–2466.
  9. Liss, J. M., Spitzer, S. M., Caviness, J. N., Adler, C., and Edwards, B. W. (2000). “Lexical boundary error analysis in hypokinetic and ataxic dysarthria,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 107(6), 3415–3424.
  10. Liss, J. M., White, L., Mattys, S. L., Lansford, K., Spitzer, S, Lotto, A. J., and Caviness, J. N. (2009). “Quantifying speech rhythm deficits in the dysarthrias,” J. Speech Lang. Hear. Res. 52(5), 1334–1352. [MEDLINE]
  11. Mattys, S., and Liss, J. M. (2008). “On building models of spoken-word recognition: When there is as much to learn from natural “oddities” as artificial normality,” J. Exp. Psychol. 70(7), 1235–1242.
  12. Mattys, S. L., White, L., and Melhorn, J. F. (2005). “Integration of multiple speech segmentation cues: a hierarchical framework,” J. Exp. Psychol. 134(4), 477–500.

Figures (1) Tables (2)

Figures (click on thumbnails to view enlargements)

FIG.1
The percent of the signal that is vocalic (%V) and the rate-normalized difference between successive vocalic intervals (nPVI) for the ten speakers providing the Higher- and Lower-intelligibility phrases, along with control values (Liss et al., 200910). Error bars reflect ±1 standard error.

FIG.1 Download High Resolution Image (.zip file) | Export Figure to PowerPoint

Tables

Table I. Lexical boundary errors (LBEs) made by the four listener groups.

View Table
Table II. Additional analysis on inaccurate responses made by the four listener groups in the two intelligibility conditions.

View Table


Close

Your Recent History Recent History Help

Recently Viewed

  1. Evidence of cue use and performance differences in deciphering dysarthric speech
  2. The magnetic resonance imaging subset of the mngu0 articulatory corpus
  3. On the use of an absorption layer for the angular spectrum approach (L)
  4. A Hamiltonian method for finding broadband modal eigenvalues
  5. Application of the Beilis–Tappert parabolic equation method to sound propagation over irregular terrain

Home Publications Meetings Contact ASA Site Map Back to Top

Copyright © Acoustical Society of America

close