Alessandro de Alarcon · Effects of Vibratory Source on Auditory-Perceptual and Bio-Inspired Computational Measures of Pediatric Voice Quality
Follow
Article1 min read·Published Sep 2026

Effects of Vibratory Source on Auditory-Perceptual and Bio-Inspired Computational Measures of Pediatric Voice Quality

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov shows its articles on its own site.

Read the article on pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov ↗

Article · Sep 2026 · 1 min read

In brief

In brief

This study compares voice quality dimensions (breathiness, roughness, strain) across three pediatric dysphonia vibratory source types using perceptual ratings and bio-inspired computational models. Children with supraglottal or mixed vibratory sources showed significantly higher roughness and strain than those with glottal sources alone, with computational amplitude modulation measures correlating with perceptual findings.

Written by the GCMD Library team from the article.

Alessandro de Alarcon

Objective: The vibratory source for voicing in children with dysphonia is classified into three categories including a glottal vibratory source (GVS) observed in those with vocal lesions or hyperfunction; supraglottal vibratory sources (SGVS) observed secondary to laryngeal airway injuries, malformations, or reconstruction surgeries; and a combination of both glottal and supraglottal vibratory sources called mixed vibratory source (MVS). This study evaluated the effects of vibratory source on three primary dimensions of voice quality (breathiness, roughness, and strain) in children with GVS, SGVS, and MVS using single-variable matching tasks and computational measures obtained from bio-inspired auditory models. Methods: A total of 44 dysphonic voice samples from children aged 4-11 years were selected. Seven listeners rated breathiness, roughness, and strain of 1000-ms /ɑ/ samples using single-variable matching tasks. Computational estimates of pitch strength, amplitude modulation filterbank output, and sharpness were obtained through custom-designed MATLAB algorithms. Results: Perceived roughness and strain were significantly higher in children with SGVS and MVS compared to children with GVS. Among the computational measures, only the modulation filterbank output resulted in significant differences among vibratory sources; a posthoc test revealed that children with SGVS had greater amplitude modulation than children with GVS, as expected from their rougher voice quality. Conc

Read it at the source ↗

Try
Intelligent Search· scoped to this article · not medical adviceSearch the whole library →