ArticleThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America2017
Measuring vocal motor skill with a virtual voice-controlled slingshot.
Article in The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Rehabilitation treatment specification system: latest tools, trials, and pathways to advance the science underlying voice therapy.Current opinion in otolaryngology & head and neck surgery · 2026Review
- Floating Ball Voice Therapy: Preliminary Effects on Outcomes and Predicting Individual Patient Differences in Generalization.Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR · 2024Article
- Quantitative Assessment of Learning and Retention in Virtual Vocal Function Exercises.Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR · 2021Article
- Back to reality: differences in learning strategy in a simplified virtual and a real throwing task.Journal of neurophysiology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Successful voice training (e.g., singing lessons) and vocal rehabilitation (e.g., therapy for a voice disorder) involve learning complex, vocal behaviors. However, there are no metrics describing how humans learn new vocal skills or predicting how long the improved behavior will persist post-therapy. To develop measures capable of describing and predicting vocal motor learning, a theory-based paradigm from limb motor control inspired the development of a virtual task where subjects throw projectiles at a target via modifications in vocal pitch and loudness. Ten subjects with healthy voices practiced this complex vocal task for five days. The many-to-one mapping between the execution variables pitch and loudness and resulting target error was evaluated using an analysis that quantified distributional properties of variability: Tolerance, noise, covariation costs (TNC costs). Lag-1 autocorrelation (AC1) and detrended-fluctuation-analysis scaling index (SCI) analyzed temporal aspects of variability. Vocal data replicated limb-based findings: TNC costs were positively correlated with error; AC1 and SCI were modulated in relation to the task's solution manifold. The data suggests that vocal and limb motor learning are similar in how the learner navigates the solution space. Future work calls for investigating the game's potential to improve voice disorder diagnosis and treatment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.