Vogel Adam P, Maruff Paul
University of Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Behav Res Methods. 2008 Nov;40(4):982-7. doi: 10.3758/BRM.40.4.982.
The use of voice acoustic techniques has the potential to extend beyond work devoted purely to speech or vocal pathology. For this to occur, however, researchers and clinicians will require acquisition technologies that provide fast, accurate, and cost-effective methods for recording data. Therefore, the present study aimed to compare industry-standard techniques for acquiring high-quality acoustic signals (e.g., hard drive and solid-state recorder) with widely available and easy-to-use, computer-based (standard laptop) data-acquisition methods. Speech samples were simultaneously acquired from 15 healthy controls using all three methods and were analyzed using identical analysis techniques. Data from all three acquisition methods were directly compared using a variety of acoustic correlates. The results suggested that selected acoustic measures (e.g., f 0, noise-to-harmonic ratio, number of pauses) were accurately obtained using all three methods; however, minimum recording standards were required for widely used measures of perturbation.
语音声学技术的应用有可能超越单纯致力于言语或嗓音病理学的工作范畴。然而，要实现这一点，研究人员和临床医生将需要获取技术，这些技术能够提供快速、准确且经济高效的数据记录方法。因此，本研究旨在将用于获取高质量声学信号的行业标准技术（例如硬盘驱动器和固态记录器）与广泛可用且易于使用的基于计算机（标准笔记本电脑）的数据采集方法进行比较。使用这三种方法同时从15名健康对照者获取语音样本，并使用相同的分析技术进行分析。使用各种声学关联指标直接比较来自所有三种采集方法的数据。结果表明，使用所有三种方法都能准确获得选定的声学指标（例如基频、噪声与谐波比、停顿次数）；然而，对于广泛使用的扰动测量指标，需要最低记录标准。
