Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Head & Neck Surgery, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, and Department of Ear, Nose and Throat, United Christian Hospital, Hospital Authority, Sha Tin, New Territories, Hong Kong, China.
J Voice. 2012 Sep;26(5):666.e13-21. doi: 10.1016/j.jvoice.2011.08.003. Epub 2012 Jan 11.
OBJECTIVE/HYPOTHESIS: The objective of this study was to determine whether different types of voice samples affect rater reliability and which type of sample can be rated most reliably, with particular reference to two types of connected speech-passage reading and conversational speech.
Prospective reliability study.
One hundred fifty voice samples from 40 speakers were presented to 14 speech pathologists experienced in managing voice disorders. Each speaker contributed three types of voice samples: sustained vowels, passage reading, and conversational speech. Ratings were made on four vocal parameters--overall severity, roughness, breathiness, and strain--on a 10-point equal-appearing interval scale.
Differences in intrarater reliability across the three types of voice samples were noted. Higher intrarater reliability was achieved with connected speech than with sustained vowel samples. Interrater reliability showed no statistically significant difference across the three types but increased with the severity of dysphonia.
This study reveals that raters give internally more reliable ratings for connected speech samples. Results also indicate that voices with severe disorders appear to be rated more reliably.
目的/假设：本研究旨在确定不同类型的语音样本是否会影响评分者的可靠性，以及哪种类型的样本可以最可靠地进行评分，特别参考两种类型的连续语音——朗读短文和会话语音。
前瞻性可靠性研究。
将 40 位发音者的 150 个语音样本提供给 14 位在嗓音障碍管理方面有经验的言语病理学家。每位发音者贡献三种类型的语音样本：持续元音、朗读短文和会话语音。评分者在 10 点等距量表上对四个嗓音参数——总严重度、粗糙声、气息声和紧张度进行评分。
在三种类型的语音样本中，评分者的内部可靠性存在差异。与持续元音样本相比，连接语音样本的内部可靠性更高。三种类型的评分者间可靠性没有统计学上的显著差异，但随着嗓音障碍的严重程度增加而增加。
本研究表明，评分者对连接语音样本的内部评分更可靠。结果还表明，严重障碍的嗓音似乎更可靠地进行评分。
