Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
J. Robbins (1984)
Acoustic differentiation of laryngeal, esophageal, and tracheoesophageal speech.Journal of speech and hearing research, 27 4
W. Panje (1981)
Prosthetic Vocal Rehabilitation following LaryngectomyAnnals of Otology, Rhinology & Laryngology, 90
R. McCroskey, M. Mulligan (1963)
The Relative Intelligibility of Esophageal Speech and Artificial-Larynx SpeechJournal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 28
B. Pauloski, H. Fisher, G. Kempster, E. Blom (1989)
Statistical differentiation of tracheoesophageal speech produced under four prosthetic/occlusion speaking conditions.Journal of speech and hearing research, 32 3
M. Greene (1957)
The voice and its disorders
R. Pindzola, Blanche Cain (1988)
Acceptability ratings of tracheoesophageal speechThe Laryngoscope, 98
M. Hyman (1955)
An experimental study of artificial-larynx and esophageal speech.The Journal of speech and hearing disorders, 20 3
L. Max, Wendy Steurs, Wendy Bruyn (1996)
Vocal Capacities in Esophageal and Tracheoesophageal SpeakersThe Laryngoscope, 106
Pamela Fujimoto, C. Madison, Lynn Larrigan (1991)
The effects of a tracheostoma valve on the intelligibility and quality of tracheoesophageal speech.Journal of speech and hearing research, 34 1
Hoops Hr, Curtis Jf (1971)
Intelligibility of the Esophageal Speaker: Relationship of Intelligibility to Overall RatingsArchives of Otolaryngology-head & Neck Surgery, 93
Panje Panje (1981)
Prosthetic vocal rehabilitation following laryngectomy: the voice buttonAnnals of Otology, Rhinology and Laryngology, 90
Cullinan Wl, Brown Cs, Blalock Pd (1986)
Ratings of intelligibility of esophageal and tracheoesophageal speechJournal of Communication Disorders, 19
M. Filter, M. Hyman (1975)
Relationship of Acoustic Parameters and Perceptual Ratings of Esophageal SpeechPerceptual and Motor Skills, 40
Williams Williams, Watson Watson (1987)
Speaking proficiency variations according to method of alaryngeal voicingLaryngoscope, 97
Raymond Kent, G. Weismer, J. Kent, J. Rosenbek (1989)
Toward phonetic intelligibility testing in dysarthria.The Journal of speech and hearing disorders, 54 4
Yorkston Yorkston, Beukelman Beukelman (1978)
A comparison of techniques for measuring intelligibility of dysarthric speechJournal of Communication Disorders, 11
E. Blom, M. Singer, R. Hamaker (1982)
Tracheostoma Valve for Postlaryngectomy Voice RehabilitationAnnals of Otology, Rhinology & Laryngology, 91
S. Williams, J. Watson (1985)
Differences in speaking proficiencies in three laryngectomee groups.Archives of otolaryngology, 111 4
M. Singer (1983)
Tracheoesophageal speech: Vocal rehabilitation after total laryngectomyThe Laryngoscope, 93
G. Shames, J. Font, J. Matthews (1963)
FACTORS RELATED TO SPEECH PROFICIENCY OF THE LARYNGECTOMIZED.The Journal of speech and hearing disorders, 28
M. Singer, E. Blom (1980)
An Endoscopic Technique for Restoration of Voice after LaryngectomyAnnals of Otology, Rhinology & Laryngology, 89
O'Leary O'Leary, Heaton Heaton, Clegg Clegg, Parker Parker (1994)
Acceptability and intelligibility of tracheoesophageal speech using the Groningen ValveFolia Phoniatrica et Logopaedica, 46
Zanoff Zanoff, Wold Wold, Montague Montague, Krueger Krueger, Drummond Drummond (1990)
Tracheoesophageal speech: with and without tracheostoma valveLaryngoscope, 100
Trudeau Trudeau (1987)
A comparison of the speech acceptability of good and excellent esophageal and tracheoesophageal speakersJournal of Communication Disorders, 20
Hoops Hoops, Curtis Curtis (1971)
Intelligibility of the esophageal speakerArchives of Otolaryngology, 93
M. Kinishi, M. Amatsu (1986)
Pitch perturbation measures of voice production of laryngectomees after the Amatsu tracheoesophageal shunt operation.Auris, nasus, larynx, 13 1
G. Blood, A. Luther, J. Stemple (1992)
Coping and Adjustment in Alaryngeal SpeakersAmerican Journal of Speech-language Pathology, 1
Philip Doyle, J. Danhauer, Charles Reed (1988)
Listeners' perceptions of consonants produced by esophageal and tracheoesophageal talkers.The Journal of speech and hearing disorders, 53 4
T. Baggs, S. Pine (1983)
Acoustic characteristics: tracheoesophageal speech.Journal of communication disorders, 16 4
J. Miralles, T. Cervera (1995)
Voice intelligibility in patients who have undergone laryngectomies.Journal of speech and hearing research, 38 3
B. Blakley, B. Podraza (1987)
Acoustic and Perceptual Assessment of Speech Using a Voice-Prosthesis with Valvular and Manual Occlusion, 97
A. Nichols (1976)
Confusions in recognizing phonemes spoken by esophageal speakers: I. initial consonants and clusters.Journal of communication disorders, 9 1
Robbins Robbins, Fisher Fisher, Blom Blom, Singer Singer (1984)
A comparative acoustic study of normal, esophageal, and tracheoesophageal speech productionJournal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 49
P. Doyle, J. Danhauer, L. Mendel (1990)
A sindscal analysis of perceptual features for consonants produced by esophageal and tracheoesophageal talkers.The Journal of speech and hearing disorders, 55 4
Alison Bridges (1991)
Acceptability ratings and intelligibility scores of alaryngeal speakers by three listener groups.The British journal of disorders of communication, 26 3
Tardy‐Mitzell Tardy‐Mitzell, Andrews Andrews, Bowman Bowman (1985)
Acceptability and intelligibility of tracheoesophageal speechArchives of Otolaryngology, 111
J. Robbins, H. Fisher, E. Blom, M. Singer (1984)
Selected acoustic features of tracheoesophageal, esophageal, and laryngeal speech.Archives of otolaryngology, 110 10
Nichols Nichols (1976)
Confusions in recognizing phonemes spoken by esophageal speakers: II. Vowels and diphthongsJournal of Communication Disorders, 9
Yingyong Qi, Bernd Weinberg (1995)
Characteristics of voicing source waveforms produced by esophageal and tracheoesophageal speakers.Journal of speech and hearing research, 38 3
J. Kreiman, B. Gerratt, G. Kempster, A. Erman, G. Berke (1993)
Perceptual evaluation of voice quality: review, tutorial, and a framework for future research.Journal of speech and hearing research, 36 1
Philip Doyle, E.Rachael Swift, R. Haaf (1989)
Effects of listener sophistication on judgements of tracheoesophageal talker intelligibility.Journal of communication disorders, 22 2
J. Clark, J. Stemple (1982)
Assessment of three modes of alaryngeal speech with a synthetic sentence identification (SSI) task in varying message-to-competition ratios.Journal of speech and hearing research, 25 3
Holley Holley, Lerman Lerman, Randolph Randolph (1983)
A comparison of the intelligibility of esophageal, electrolaryngeal, and normal speech in quiet and in noiseJournal of Communication Disorders, 16
M. Kalb, M. Carpenter (1981)
Individual speaker influence on relative intelligibility of esophageal speech and artificial larynx speech.The Journal of speech and hearing disorders, 46 1
Clarke Clarke, Hoops Hoops (1970)
The effect of speech‐type background noise on esophageal speech productionAnnals of Otology, Rhinology & Laryngology, 79
The purpose of this study was to compare the intelligibility of two types of alaryngeal speech commonly used after total laryngectomy. Four male oesophageal speakers and four male tracheo‐oesophageal speakers read a series of monosyllabic words, multisyllabic words and sentences. The monosyllabic word list consisted of several minimal pairs for each of eight phonetic contrasts; multisyllabic words and sentences were not selected on specific phonetic grounds. Audio recordings of all subjects’ readings were presented to eight naïve adult listeners who completed both an item identification task and a scaling procedure. The item identification task revealed higher intelligibility for tracheo‐oesophageal speakers than for oesophageal speakers during the monosyllabic word condition. Results from the scaling procedure indicated that listeners’ subjective intelligibility ratings were also higher for the tracheo‐oesophageal speakers than for the oesophageal speakers. Moreover, a high positive correlation was found between the speakers’ intelligibility scores obtained from the word identification task and the scaling procedure. Le but de cette étude était d'identifer deux types de parole alaryngale utilisée communément après une laryngotomie totale. Quatre locuteurs oesophagien et quatre locuteurs trachéo‐oesphagien, tous mâles, ont lu une série de mots monosyllabiques de mots plurisyallabiques et de phrases. La liste de mots monosyllabiques consistait enplusieurs paires minimales pour chacun de huit contrastes phonétiques; les mots pleurisyllabiques et les phrases n'avaient pas été choisis selon des critères phonétiques particuliers. L'on a présenté les enregistrements sonores des lectures de tous les sujets à huit auditeurs adultes non avertis, qui ont rempli un questionnaire consistant en une épreuve d'identification des éléments de la liste et en un procédé de barémisation. L'épreuve d'identification a révélé une intelligibité supérieure chez les locuteurs trachéo‐oesophagien par rapport au locuteurs oesophagien dans le cas des mots monosyllabiques. Les résultats du procédé de barémisation indiquent que les évaluation subjectives d'intelligibilité étaient aussi supérieures pour les locuteurs trachéo‐oesophagien. De plus, I'on a trouvé une corrélation fortement positive entre la notation d'évaluation d'intelligibilité obtenue à partir des épreuves d'identification des mots, et le procédé de barémisation. Ziel dieser Studie war der Vergleich zweier Arten alaryngaler Sprache, die häufig nach Totallaryngektomie eingesetzt werden. Vier männliche Äsophagalsprecher und vier Tracheoäsophagalsprecher lasen einsilbige und mehrsilbige Wörter und Sätze vor. Die Einsilblerwortliste enthielt mehrere Minimalpaare für 8 phonemische Oppositionen; die mehrsilbigen Wörter und die Sätze wurden nicht aufgrund spezifisch phonetischer Gesichtspunkte ausgewählt. Audioaufzeichnungen aller acht Personen wurden acht ungeschulten Erwachsenen vorgespielt, die eine Identifikations‐ und eine Skalierungsaufgabe durchführten. Die Identifikationsaufgabe zeigte für die Einsilblererkennung eine höhere Verständlichkeit für die Tracheoäsophagalsprecher als für die Äsophagalsprecher. Auch die Ergebnisse der Skalierungsaufgabe wiesen eine höhere subjektive Verständlichkeit für die Tracheoäsophagalsprecher als für die Äsophagalsprecher auf. Außerdem wurde eine hohe positive Korrelation zwischen den Verständlichkeitsmaßen aus Wortident ifikationsaufgaben und Skalierungsverfahren festgestellt.
International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders – Wiley
Published: Oct 12, 1997
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.