1887
banner image
No data available.
Please log in to see this content.
You have no subscription access to this content.
No metrics data to plot.
The attempt to load metrics for this article has failed.
The attempt to plot a graph for these metrics has failed.
Effects of bite blocks and hearing status on vowel productiona)
a)The order of authors after the first is alphabetical.
Rent:
Rent this article for
USD
10.1121/1.2001527
    + View Affiliations - Hide Affiliations
    Affiliations:
    1 Department of Psychology, Northeastern University, Boston, Massachusetts 02116 and Speech Communication Group, Research Laboratory of Electronics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Room 36-511, 50 Vassar Street, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139
    2 Speech Communication Group, Research Laboratory of Electronics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Room 36-511, 50 Vassar Street, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139
    3 Department of Cognitive and Neural Systems, Boston University, Boston, Massachusetts 02215 and Speech Communication Group, Research Laboratory of Electronics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Room 36-511, 50 Vassar Street, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139
    4 Department of Health Sciences, Boston University, Boston, Massachusetts 02215 and Speech Communication Group, Research Laboratory of Electronics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Room 36-511, 50 Vassar Street, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139
    5 Université de Québec a Montréal, Quebec, Canada and Speech Communication Group, Research Laboratory of Electronics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Room 36-511, 50 Vassar Street, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139
    6 Speech Communication Group, Research Laboratory of Electronics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Room 36-511, 50 Vassar Street, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139; Department of Cognitive and Neural Systems, Boston University, Boston, Massachusetts 02215; and Department of Brain and Cognitive Sciences, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139
    7 Speech Communication Group, Research Laboratory of Electronics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Room 36-511, 50 Vassar Street, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139
    8 Speech Communication Group, Research Laboratory of Electronics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Room 36-511, 50 Vassar Street, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139 and Haskins Laboratories, New Haven, Connecticut 06511
    9 Department of Speech and Hearing Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington 98105 and Speech Communication Group, Research Laboratory of Electronics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Room 36-511, 50 Vassar Street, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139
    10 Speech Communication Group, Research Laboratory of Electronics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Room 36-511, 50 Vassar Street, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139 and Department of Cognitive and Neural Systems, Boston University, Boston, Massachusetts 02215
    c) Electronic mail: lane@neu.edu
    J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 118, 1636 (2005); http://dx.doi.org/10.1121/1.2001527
/content/asa/journal/jasa/118/3/10.1121/1.2001527
http://aip.metastore.ingenta.com/content/asa/journal/jasa/118/3/10.1121/1.2001527

Figures

Image of FIG. 1.
FIG. 1.

Schematic diagram of the functionality of the DIVA model. Cells in premotor, motor, and sensory cortical areas are indicated by boxes. Dashed lines: projections from premotor to sensory cortex that encode expected sensory consequences. Dotted lines: projections from sensory periphery to sensory cortex. Solid lines: projections that encode motor commands.

Image of FIG. 2.
FIG. 2.

According to the DIVA model, during speech production an auditory trajectory is planned to pass through the sequence of auditory goals that correspond to the input phoneme string. When the dispersion of the goal region is reduced (dotted squares), the contrast distance between the goals increases (dotted double-headed arrow).

Image of FIG. 3.
FIG. 3.

Mean token dispersion in the formant plane for the five vowels elicited. For the implant users (left pane), dispersion is plotted as a function of the time sample, and presence (“ON”) or absence of auditory feedback during elicitation, with bite block insertion (triangles) as a parameter. For the speakers with normal hearing, the treatments were presence or absence of auditory feedback and of bite block (triangles). (For the cochlear implant users, each point is the mean of 800 determinations, 20 repetitions of each of 5 vowels produced by 8 speakers. For the hearing controls, each point is the mean of 700 determinations, 20 repetitions of 5 vowels produced by 7 speakers.) Error bars are one standard error of the mean.

Image of FIG. 4.
FIG. 4.

(Color online) Compensation for bite block in three time samples for implant users and one for controls. The vertical axis plots the average effect on F1 of inserting the bite block, compared to measures without a bite block, and normalized by the latter (percent change). The horizontal axis plots the comparable measure for F2. Closed circles represent measures made with auditory feedback available; open, no feedback. (For the cochlear implant users, each point is the mean of 160 determinations, 20 repetitions by 8 speakers. For the hearing controls, each point is the mean of 140 determinations, 20 repetitions by 8 speakers.)

Image of FIG. 5.
FIG. 5.

The average size of the vowel space (AVS) is expressed as the mean of (the square root of) the Mahalanobis distances between the members of all ten possible pairs of the five vowels. For the implant users (left pane), AVS is plotted as a function of the time sample, and presence (“ON”) or absence of auditory feedback during elicitation, with bite block insertion (triangles) as a parameter. For the controls, the treatments were presence or absence of auditory feedback and of bite block (triangles). (For the cochlear implant users, each point is the mean of 800 determinations of average vowel spacing. The 4 distances from each vowel token to the other tokens in each repetition set were averaged, and a grand mean obtained for the 20 repetitions of each of the 5 vowels produced by 8 speakers. For the hearing controls, each point is the mean of 700 determinations, 20 repetitions of 5 vowels produced by 7 speakers.) Error bars are one standard error of the mean.

Tables

Generic image for table
TABLE I.

Characteristics of participants with cochlear implants.

Generic image for table
TABLE II.

Analysis of variance of dispersion measures for eight implant users .

Generic image for table
TABLE III.

Analysis of variance of dispersion measures for seven control subjects with normal hearing .

Generic image for table
TABLE IV.

Analysis of variance for the measures of average vowel space for implant users .

Generic image for table
TABLE V.

Analysis of variance for the measures of average vowel space for control speakers with normal hearing .

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/asa/journal/jasa/118/3/10.1121/1.2001527
2005-09-01
2014-04-19
Loading

Full text loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
752b84549af89a08dbdd7fdb8b9568b5 journal.articlezxybnytfddd
Scitation: Effects of bite blocks and hearing status on vowel productiona)
http://aip.metastore.ingenta.com/content/asa/journal/jasa/118/3/10.1121/1.2001527
10.1121/1.2001527
SEARCH_EXPAND_ITEM