Electroglottographic contact quotient in different phonation types using different amplitude threshold levels

References

• Baken RJ. Electroglottography. J Voice. 1992;6:98–110.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peterson KL, Verdolini-Marston K, Barkmeier JM, Hoffman HT. Comparison of aerodynamic and electroglottographic parameters in evaluating clinically relevant voicing pattern. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol. 1994;103:335–46.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Verdolini K, Druker DG, Palmer PM, Samawi H. Laryngeal adduction in resonant voice. J Voice. 1998;12:315–27.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baken RJ, Orlikoff RF. Clinical measurement of speech and voice. San Diego, CA: Singular/Thomson Delmar; 2000.
   Google Scholar
• Colton RH, Conture EG. Problems and pitfalls of electroglottography. J Voice. 1990;4:10–24.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Orlikoff RF. Assessment of the dynamics of vocal fold contact from the electroglottogram: data from normal male subjects. J Speech Hear Res. 1991;34:1066–72.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Howard DM. Variation of electrolaryngographically derived closed quotient for trained and untrained adult female singers. J Voice. 1995;9:163–72.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lim J, Choi J, Kim K, Choi H. Voice analysis of patients with diverse types of reinke's edema and clinical use of electroglottographic measurements. Acta Otolaryngol. 2006;126:62–9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gaskill CS, Erickson ML. The effect of a voiced lip trill on estimated glottal closed quotient. J Voice. 2008;22:634–43.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Solomon NP. Vocal fatigue and its relation to vocal hyperfunction. Int J Speech Lang Pathol. 2008;10:254–66.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Laukkanen A, Mäki E, Leppänen K. Electroglottogram-based estimation of vocal economy: ‘Quasi-output-cost ratio’. Folia Phoniatr Logop. 2009;61:316–22.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bhandari A, Izdebski K, Huang C, Yan Y. Comparative analysis of normal voice characteristics using simultaneous electroglottography and high speed digital imaging. Biomed Sign Proc Contr. 2012;7:20–6.
   Google Scholar
• Rothenberg M, Mashie J. Monitoring vocal fold abduction through vocal fold contact area. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 1988;31:338–51.
   Google Scholar
• Howard DM. Electroglottogrphy/electrolaryngography. In: Fried MP, Ferlito A. editors. The larynx. 3rd ed. San Diego: Plural Press; 2009. p. 227–43.
   Google Scholar
• Higgins MB, Saxman JH. Inverse-filtered air flow and EGG measures for sustained vowels and syllables. J Voice. 1993;7:47–53.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sapienza CM, Stathopoulos ET, Dromey C. Approximations of open quotient and speed quotient from glottal airflow and egg waveforms: effects of measurement criteria and sound pressure level. J Voice. 1998;12:31–43.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Higgins MB, Schulte L. Gender differences in vocal fold contact computed from electroglottographic signal: the influence of measurement criteria. J Acoust Soc Am. 2002;111: 1865–71.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kania RE, Hans S, Hartl DM, Clement P, Crevier-Buchman L, Brasnu DF. Variability of electroglottograpic glottal closed quotients: necessity of standardization to obtain normative values. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2004;130:349–52.
   Google Scholar
• Herbst C, Ternström S. A comparison of different methods to measure the EGG contact quotient. Logoped Phoniatr Vocol. 2006;31:126–38.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Henrich N, d'Alessandro C, Doval B, Castellengo M. On the use of the derivative of electroglottographic signal for characterization of nonpathological phonation. J Acoust Soc Am. 2004;115:1321–32.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dromey C, Stathopoulos ET, Sapienza CM. Glottal airflow and electroglottographic measures of vocal function at multiple intensities. J Voice. 1992;6:44–54.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huang DZ, Minifie FD, Kasuya H, Lin SX. Measures of vocal function during changes in vocal effort level. J Voice. 1995;9:429–38.
   Google Scholar
• Holmberg EB, Hillman RE. Comparisons among aerodynamic, electroglottographic, and acoustic spectral measures of female voice. J Speech Hear Res. 1995;38:1212–24.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hacki T. Electroglottographic quasi-open quotient and amplitude in crescendo phonation. J Voice. 1996;10: 342–7.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Salomão GL, Sundberg J. What do male singers mean by modal and falsetto register? An investigation of the glottal voice source. Logoped Phoniatr Vocol. 2009;34: 73–83.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Paul N, Kumar S, Chatterjee I, Mukherjee B. Electroglottographic parameterization of the effects of gender, vowel and phonatory registers on vocal fold vibratory patterns: an Indian perspective. Indian J Otolaryngol. 2011;63: 27–31.
   Google Scholar
• Chen Y, Robb MP, Gilbert HR. Electroglottographic evaluation of gender and vowel effects during modal and vocal fry phonation. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2002;45: 821–9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roubeau B, Henrich N, Castellengo M. Laryngeal vibratory mechanisms: the notion of vocal register revisited. J Voice. 2009;23:425–38.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Howard DM, Lindsey GA, Allen B. Toward the quantification of vocal efficiency. J Voice. 1990;4:205–12.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Airas M, Alku P. Comparison of multiple voice source parameters in different phonation types. Proceedings of the 8th Annual Conference of International Speech Communication Association (Interspeech 2007). Antwerpen, Belgium, 27–31 August 2007. International Speech Communication Association (ISCA); 2007. p. 1410–3.
   Google Scholar
• Kreiman J, Gerratt BR. Perceptual evaluation of voice quality: review, tutorial, and a framework for future research. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 1993;36:21–41.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kreiman J, Gerratt BR. The perceptual structure of pathologic voice quality. J Acoust Soc Am. 1996;100:1787–95.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bele IV. Reliability in perceptual analysis of voice quality. J Voice. 2005;19:555–73.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kreiman J, Gerratt BR, Precoda K, Berke GS. Individual differences in voice quality perception. J Speech Hear Res. 1992;35:512–20.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Gerratt BR, Kreiman J. Comparing internal and external standards in voice quality judgments. J Speech Hear Res. 1993;36:14–20.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Chan KMK, Yiu EM. The effect of anchors and training on the reliability of perceptual voice evaluation. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2002;45:111–26.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eadie TL, Baylor CR. The effect of perceptual training on inexperienced listeners’ judgments of dysphonic voice. J Voice. 2006;20:527–44.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yiu EM, Chan KMK, Mok RSM. Reliability and confidence in using a paired comparison paradigm in perceptual voice quality evaluation. Clin Linguist Phon. 2007;21:129–45.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sulter A, Wit H. Glottal volume velocity waveform characteristics in subjects with and without vocal training, related to gender, sound intensity, fundamental frequency, and age. J Acoust Soc Am. 1996;100:3360–73.
   Google Scholar
• Lebowitz A, Baken RJ. Correlates of the belt voice: a broader examination. J Voice. 2011;25:159–65.
   Google Scholar
• Titze IR. Interpretation of the electroglottographic signal. J Voice. 1990;4:1–9.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kent R. Hearing and believing: some limits to the auditory-perceptual assessment of speech and voice disorders. Am J Speech Lang Pathol. 1996;5:7–23.
   Google Scholar
• Lavie N, Hirst A, de Fockert JW, Viding E. Load theory of selective attention and cognitive control. J Exp Psychol Gen. 2004;133:339–54.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cartwright-Finch U, Lavie N. The role of perceptual load in inattentional blindness. Cognition. 2007;102:321–40.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• de Krom G. Consistency and reliability of voice quality ratings for different types of speech fragments. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 1994;37:985–1000.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Parsa V, Jamieson DG. Acoustic discrimination of pathological voice: sustained vowels versus continuous speech. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2001;44:327–39.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ma EP, Love AL. Electroglottographic evaluation of age and gender effects during sustained phonation and connected speech. J Voice. 2010;24:146–52.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar