|
The purpose of the study is to examine differences in subglottic air pressure as a function of phonetic context. The phonetic contexts consisted of /i:p/sup h/i:p/sup h/i:/, /p/sup h/i:p/sup h/i:/, and /p/sup h/p/sup h//. The aerodynamic and phonatory parameters are investigated in 20 female normal adults. All measurements are taken and analysed using Aerophone II voice function analyzer. The aerodynamic parameters are Peak Air Pressure(PAP) and Mean Air Pressure(MAP), and the phonatory parameters are Phonatory Flow Rate(PFR) Maximum SPL(MSPL), Phonatory SPL(PSPL), Phonatory Power (PP), Phonatory Efficiency(PE), and Phonatory Resistance＊ 10-5(PR). A one-way ANOVA revealed the following results. First, the aerodynamic parameters are not significantly different. Second, Peak Air Pressure(PAP) and Mean Air Pressure(MAP), as well as the phonatory parameters such as Phonatory Flow Rate(PFR) Maximum SPL(MSPL), Phonatory SPL(PSPL), and Phonatory Efficiency(PE) were significantly different. Therefore, it is advised that clinicians use only aerodynamic parameters but phonatory parameters when using Aerophone II.
|