ArticleJournal of voice : official journal of the Voice Foundation2025
Empirical Evaluation of the Role of Vocal Fold Collision on Relative Fundamental Frequency in Voicing Offset.
Article in Journal of voice : official journal of the Voice Foundation, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Capturing the Intraspeaker Heterogeneity of Vocal Hyperfunction Using Spatiotemporal Indices of Relative Fundamental Frequency.Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesRelative fundamental frequency (RFF) is an acoustic measure of changes in fundamental frequency during voicing transitions. The physiological mechanisms underlying RFF remain unclear. Recent modeling suggests that changes in RFF during voicing offset are due to decreases in overall system stiffness as a direct result of the cessation of vocal fold collision. To evaluate this finding empirically, here we examined whether variable timing between the end of vocal fold collision and the final voicing cycle used to calculate RFF explained the variability in RFF across individual voicing offset utterances.
methodsRFF during voicing offset was calculated from /ifi/ utterances produced by 35 participants under endoscopy, with and without vocal effort. RFF was calculated via two methods, in which utterances were aligned by (1) the end of vocal fold collision, or (2) the end of voicing. Analyses of variance were used to determine the effects of vocal effort and RFF method on the mean and standard deviation of RFF.
resultsAligning by vocal fold collision resulted in statistically significantly lower standard deviations. RFF means were statistically higher using the collision method; however, the degree of vocal effort was statistically significant regardless of the method.
conclusionsThese results provide empirical evidence to support that decreases in RFF during voicing offset are a result of decreases in system stiffness due to termination of vocal fold collision.
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.