Perception of pitch location within a speaker's range: fundamental frequency, voice quality and speaker sex
- PMID: 22894229
- DOI: 10.1121/1.4714351
Perception of pitch location within a speaker's range: fundamental frequency, voice quality and speaker sex
Abstract
How are listeners able to identify whether the pitch of a brief isolated sample of an unknown voice is high or low in the overall pitch range of that speaker? Does the speaker's voice quality convey crucial information about pitch level? Results and statistical models of two experiments that provide answers to these questions are presented. First, listeners rated the pitch levels of vowels taken over the full pitch ranges of male and female speakers. The absolute f0 of the samples was by far the most important determinant of listeners' ratings, but with some effect of the sex of the speaker. Acoustic measures of voice quality had only a very small effect on these ratings. This result suggests that listeners have expectations about f0s for average speakers of each sex, and judge voice samples against such expectations. Second, listeners judged speaker sex for the same speech samples. Again, absolute f0 was the most important determinant of listeners' judgments, but now voice quality measures also played a role. Thus it seems that pitch level judgments depend on voice quality mostly indirectly, through its information about sex. Absolute f0 is the most important information for deciding both pitch level and speaker sex.
Similar articles
-
Influence of speaker gender on listener judgments of tracheoesophageal speech.J Voice. 2008 Jan;22(1):43-57. doi: 10.1016/j.jvoice.2006.08.008. Epub 2006 Oct 18. J Voice. 2008. PMID: 17055223
-
Perception of pitch location within a speaker's F0 range.J Acoust Soc Am. 2005 Apr;117(4 Pt 1):2193-200. doi: 10.1121/1.1841751. J Acoust Soc Am. 2005. PMID: 15898660
-
The effect of perceptual training on inexperienced listeners' judgments of dysphonic voice.J Voice. 2006 Dec;20(4):527-44. doi: 10.1016/j.jvoice.2005.08.007. Epub 2005 Dec 1. J Voice. 2006. PMID: 16324823
-
Voice, Articulation, and Prosody Contribute to Listener Perceptions of Speaker Gender: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2018 Feb 15;61(2):266-297. doi: 10.1044/2017_JSLHR-S-17-0067. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2018. PMID: 29392290
-
A systematic review of the voice-tagging hypothesis of speech-in-noise perception.Neuropsychologia. 2020 Jan;136:107256. doi: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2019.107256. Epub 2019 Nov 9. Neuropsychologia. 2020. PMID: 31715197
Cited by
-
Tonal Language Speakers Are Better Able to Segregate Competing Speech According to Talker Sex Differences.J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2020 Aug 10;63(8):2801-2810. doi: 10.1044/2020_JSLHR-19-00421. Epub 2020 Jul 17. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2020. PMID: 32692939 Free PMC article.
-
It's Not Only What You Say, But Also How You Say It: Machine Learning Approach to Estimate Trust from Conversation.Hum Factors. 2024 Jun;66(6):1724-1741. doi: 10.1177/00187208231166624. Epub 2023 Apr 28. Hum Factors. 2024. PMID: 37116009 Free PMC article.
-
Contribution of laryngeal size to differences between male and female voice production.J Acoust Soc Am. 2021 Dec;150(6):4511. doi: 10.1121/10.0009033. J Acoust Soc Am. 2021. PMID: 34972311 Free PMC article.
-
The memorability of voices is predictable and consistent across listeners.Nat Hum Behav. 2025 Apr;9(4):758-768. doi: 10.1038/s41562-025-02112-w. Epub 2025 Feb 26. Nat Hum Behav. 2025. PMID: 40011684
-
Towards Evaluating Pitch-Related Phonation Function in Speech Communication Using High-Density Surface Electromyography.Front Neurosci. 2022 Jul 22;16:941594. doi: 10.3389/fnins.2022.941594. eCollection 2022. Front Neurosci. 2022. PMID: 35937895 Free PMC article.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources