COMPARING RELIABILITY OF PERCEPTUAL RATINGS OF ROUGHNESS AND ACOUSTIC MEASURES OF JITTER
COMPARING RELIABILITY OF PERCEPTUAL RATINGS OF ROUGHNESS AND ACOUSTIC MEASURES OF JITTER
复制标题
DOI：
10.1044/jshr.3801.26
复制
发表时间：
1995-02-01
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
BIELAMOWICZ, S
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
RABINOV, CR;KREIMAN, J;BIELAMOWICZ, S
声学分析通常比声音的感知评估更受青睐，因为它被认为是客观的，因此是可靠的。然而，最近的研究表明，这种传统的偏见是没有根据的。这项研究考察了人类听者和自动系统在评估病理性声音时测量扰动的相对可靠性。10位经验丰富的听众对50个声音样本(从正常到严重紊乱)的粗糙度进行了75 mm的视觉模拟评分。将听众内部和听众之间的可靠性评级与几个语音分析系统(CSpeech、SoundScope、CSL和交互式手写标记系统)产生的抖动测量的可靠性进行了比较。结果显示，总体上，听众同意的程度与“客观”算法不相上下，甚至更好。此外，听众以可预见的方式不同意，而自动算法则以看似随机的方式不同。最后，听者的可靠性随着病理严重程度的增加而增加；客观方法随着严重程度的增加而迅速失效。这些发现表明，听众和分析包在测量特征上有很大的不同。在区分基本正常的声音时，声学测量可能比感知测量更有优势；然而，可靠性并不是更喜欢扰动的声学测量而不是感知测量的充分理由。
Acoustic analysis is often favored over perceptual evaluation of voice because it is considered objective, and thus reliable. However, recent studies suggest this traditional bias is unwarranted. This study examined the relative reliability of human listeners and automatic systems for measuring perturbation in the evaluation of pathologic voices. Ten experienced listeners rated the roughness of 50 voice samples (ranging from normal to severely disordered) on a 75 mm visual analog scale. Rating reliability within and across listeners was compared to the reliability of jitter measures produced by several voice analysis systems (CSpeech, SoundScope, CSL, and an interactive hand-marking system). Results showed that overall listeners agreed as well or better than ''objective'' algorithms. Further, listeners disagreed in predictable ways, whereas automatic algorithms differed in seemingly random fashions. Finally, listener reliability increased with severity of pathology; objective methods quickly broke down as severity increased. These findings suggest that listeners and analysis packages differ greatly in their measurement characteristics. Acoustic measures may have advantages over perceptual measures for discriminating among essentially normal voices; however, reliability is not a good reason for preferring acoustic measures of perturbation to perceptual measures.