Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Outline
Quick review of the venerable history of current quality assessment protocols Discussion of theoretical reasons why these protocols remain unsatisfactory measurement tools Presentation of a psychological model of quality perception; and Description of the way in which this perceptual model can lead to psychoacoustic models of voice quality and reliable, valid, practical clinical measurement protocols.
Why include the listener? Why not just measure the acoustic signal?
Just as loudness and pitch do not exist without the listener, vocal quality is an acoustic-PERCEPTUAL phenomenon. We must be able to model listeners responses in order to reach our ultimate goal: a theoretical understanding sufficient to relate the perceived sound of a voice to the physiology that produced it, and physiology to the resultant percept.
CAPE-V protocol
Developed from a consensus meeting Design goals:
minimal set of meaningful parameters measures obtainable expediently applicable to a broad range of voices and settings reliable and valid with exemplars available for training
P (exact) = 0.21
P (exact) = 0.26
Roughness ratings Breathiness ratings
Depend on inconsistent correlations with perceptual measures for validity as measures of quality
What to do?
Find the sources of variability. Develop alternative measurement approaches that target and reduce this variability.
Experimental evidence
Four experimental factors, corresponding to these four theoretical factors:
Presence/absence of comparison stimuli; Comparison stimuli that were/were not matched to the voices being rated; Visual analog versus 6-point rating scales; The overall mean rating for each voice
Listeners should agree best when all factors are controlled, and worst when nothing is controlled.
Results
These four factors accounted for 84.2% of the variance in the likelihood that listeners would agree exactly in their ratings.
Continuous (visual analog) versus 6-point scales for breathiness Overall mean rating for each voice included as a covariate in the ANCOVA analysis
Avoid reliance on internal standards and help listeners focus attention Not depend on selection/definition of labels for quality dimensions Have fine scale resolution An analysis-by-synthesis approach meets these criteria.
What now?
So: We have a model of voice quality perception that shows us how to measure quality reliably and validly. Based on this model, we have developed a tool for assessing the perceptual importance of different acoustic parameters. Unfortunately, this model may never translate directly into a practical clinical application. HOWEVER
What now?
We can use these methods to perceptually validate acoustic measures and derive a true PSYCHOACOUSTIC model of voice quality.
For example, dB is a perceptually validated measure that relates intensity to perceived loudness.
Psychoacoustic modeling
Such a psychoacoustic model could eliminate the need for subjective quality measures, because:
The perceptual importance of each acoustic parameter can be established; interactions among parameters can be modeled; and the composite set of parameters can be selected so that it is adequate to specify voice quality.
A theory of voice
We submit that development of such a comprehensive theory should be the primary goal of voice research.
Summary
The last 2000 years have produced awareness and descriptions of the importance of voice and its uses Previous work has not led to very much understanding of the whys of quality, so measurement techniques remain unsatisfying. We may be quite near a solution to this long-term problem. Even more ambitious goals are obtainable once the problem of generating reliable and valid measures of voice is solved.
Conclusion
When we cannot measure, our knowledge is meager and unsatisfactory.
Attributed to Lord Kelvin