Research Article

Comparing of two Farsi passages in laboratory evaluation of mean and fundamental frequency variations range

Abstract

Background and Aim: Voice disorders assess with the help of laboratory equipments and perceptual evaluation. Voice samples involve vowel prolongation, text-reading or conversational speech. In Iran, Rainbow text and Grandfather text, were developed for assessing voice.
Methods: This study was cross-sectional and descriptive-analytical. Mean and fundamental frequency variations range in 120 normal males and females aging from 20-59 years old were studied. Voice samples of reading both texts were gathered and compared.
Results: Mean fundamental frequency in males in Grandfather text was 137.93 with SD 1.2 and in Rainbow text was 135.09 with SD 1.1 (p>0.05), in females Grandfather and Rainbow texts were 206.07 with SD 0.9 and 204.23 with SD 2.1, respectively (p>0.05). Fundamental frequency variations range in Grandfather text in males was 88.10 with SD 0.8 and in females was 116.77 with SD 1.3 and in Rainbow text in males was 90.92 with SD 1.1, in females was 116.08 with SD 1.2 (p>0.05). Mean fundamental frequency of males in each text didn't show significant difference in age groups and just in 50-59 age group of the female population showed significant difference. Fundamental frequency variations range didn't show significant difference in males and females in both texts.
Conclusion: These two texts were the same in measurement of average and fundamental frequency variations range in adults. Significant difference showed between 50-59 age group of the female population and other groups.

1. Vogel AP, Maruff P, Snyder PJ, Mundt JC. Standardization of pitch-range settings in voice acoustic analysis. Behav Res Methods. 2009;41(2):318-24.
2. Hollien H, Hollien PA, de Jong G. Effects of three parameters on speaking fundamental frequency. J Acoust Soc Am. 1997;102(5pt1):2984-92.
3. Powell TW. A comparison of English reading passages for elicitation of speech samples from clinical populations. Clin Linguist Phon. 2006;20(2-3):91-7.
4. Andrianopoulos MV, Darrow K, Chen J. Multimodal standardization of voice among four multicultural populations formant structures. J Voice. 2001;15(1):61-77.
5. Morris R. Speaking fundamental frequency characteristics of 8- through 10-year-old white- and African-American boys. J Commun Disord. 1997;30(2):101-14.
6. Ghorbani A, Torabinejad F, Armandi L. Fundamental frequency in males and females from Iranian, Turk, and Kurd race. Audiol. 2006;14(2):45-50. Persian.
7. Memarian A, Ghorbani A, Torabinejad F, Keyhani MR. Designing a Farsi text for the assessment of adult voice features and determining its validity and reliability in measuring the fundamental frequency and intensity of speech. JRRS. 2008;4(2):117-24.
IssueVol 21 No 1 (2012) QRcode
SectionResearch Article(s)
Keywords
Fundamental frequency fundamental frequency variations range voice laboratory evaluation Grandfather passage Rainbow passage
Rights and permissions
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
How to Cite
1.
Aghajanzadeh M, Ghorbani A, Torabinezhad F, Keyhani MR. Comparing of two Farsi passages in laboratory evaluation of mean and fundamental frequency variations range. Aud Vestib Res. 2017;21(1):62-68.