Effects of Nasal Port Area on Perception of Nasality and Measures of Nasalance Based on Computational Modeling

Overview

Journal Cleft Palate Craniofac J

Specialties Dentistry
General Surgery

Date 2014 Jan 21

PMID 24437587

Citations 4

Authors

Kate Bunton

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Objective: This study examined the relation between nasal port area, nasalance, and perceptual ratings of nasality for three English corner vowels, /i/, /u/, and /a/.

Design: Samples were simulated using a computational model that allowed for exact control of nasal port size and direct measures of nasalance. Perceptual ratings were obtained using a paired stimulus presentation.

Participants: Four experienced listeners.

Main Outcome Measures: Nasalance and perceptual ratings of nasality.

Results: Findings show that perceptual ratings of nasality and nasalance increased for samples generated with nasal port areas up to and including 0.16 cm(2) but plateaued in samples generated with larger nasal port areas. No vowel differences were noted for perceptual ratings.

Conclusions: This work extends previously published work by including nasal port areas representative of those reported in the literature for clinical populations. Continued work using samples with varied phonetic context and varying suprasegmental and temporal characteristics are needed.

Citing Articles

Velopharyngeal Gap Size During Sustained Vowel Production Correlates With Perceptual Ratings of Hypernasality in Connected Speech.

Williams J, Perry J, Bunton K, Cordero K, Snodgrass T, Singh D J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2024; 67(9):2977-2986.

PMID: 39173051 PMC: 11427416. DOI: 10.1044/2024_JSLHR-24-00221.

Numerical investigation of effects of tongue articulation and velopharyngeal closure on the production of sibilant [s].

Lu H, Yoshinaga T, Li C, Nozaki K, Iida A, Tsubokura M Sci Rep. 2022; 12(1):15361.

PMID: 36100616 PMC: 9470661. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-022-18784-7.

Change in aeroacoustic sound mechanism during sibilant sound with different velopharyngeal opening sizes.

Sundstrom E, Oren L Med Biol Eng Comput. 2021; 59(4):937-945.

PMID: 33797695 PMC: 9152924. DOI: 10.1007/s11517-021-02356-4.

Effects of velopharyngeal openings on flow characteristics of nasal emission.

Sundstrom E, Boyce S, Oren L Biomech Model Mechanobiol. 2020; 19(5):1447-1459.

PMID: 31925590 PMC: 7347459. DOI: 10.1007/s10237-019-01280-9.

References

Carney P, Sherman D . Severity of nasality in three selected speech tasks. J Speech Hear Res. 1971; 14(2):396-407. DOI: 10.1044/jshr.1402.396. View

Carney P, Morris H . Structural correlates of nasality. Cleft Palate J. 1971; 8:307-21. View

Laine T, Warren D, Dalston R, Morr K . Screening of velopharyngeal closure based on nasal airflow rate measurements. Cleft Palate J. 1988; 25(3):220-5. View

Warren D . Perci: a method for rating palatal efficiency. Cleft Palate J. 1979; 16(3):279-85. View

Story B . Comparison of magnetic resonance imaging-based vocal tract area functions obtained from the same speaker in 1994 and 2002. J Acoust Soc Am. 2008; 123(1):327-35. PMC: 2377017. DOI: 10.1121/1.2805683. View

Kummer A, Briggs M, Lee L . The relationship between the characteristics of speech and velopharyngeal gap size. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2003; 40(6):590-6. DOI: 10.1597/1545-1569_2003_040_0590_trbtco_2.0.co_2. View

Brancamp T, Lewis K, Watterson T . The relationship between nasalance scores and nasality ratings obtained with equal appearing interval and direct magnitude estimation scaling methods. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2010; 47(6):631-7. DOI: 10.1597/09-106. View

Hillenbrand J, Gayvert R . Open source software for experiment design and control. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2005; 48(1):45-60. DOI: 10.1044/1092-4388(2005/005). View

Bunton K, Story B . The relation of nasality and nasalance to nasal port area based on a computational model. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2011; 49(6):741-9. PMC: 3638741. DOI: 10.1597/11-131. View

10.

Shrout P, Fleiss J . Intraclass correlations: uses in assessing rater reliability. Psychol Bull. 1979; 86(2):420-8. DOI: 10.1037//0033-2909.86.2.420. View

11.

Dalston R, Warren D, Dalston E . Use of nasometry as a diagnostic tool for identifying patients with velopharyngeal impairment. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 1991; 28(2):184-8; discussion 188-9. DOI: 10.1597/1545-1569_1991_028_0184_uonaad_2.3.co_2. View

12.

LINTZ L, Sherman D . Phonetic elements and perception of nasality. J Speech Hear Res. 1961; 4:381-96. DOI: 10.1044/jshr.0404.381. View

13.

Watterson T, McFarlane S, Wright D . The relationship between nasalance and nasality in children with cleft palate. J Commun Disord. 1993; 26(1):13-28. DOI: 10.1016/0021-9924(93)90013-z. View