Louisiana State University Nasalance Protocol Standardization
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Louisiana State University LSU Digital Commons LSU Master's Theses Graduate School 2004 Louisiana State University nasalance protocol standardization Kathryn Ruth Kendrick Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_theses Part of the Communication Sciences and Disorders Commons Recommended Citation Kendrick, Kathryn Ruth, "Louisiana State University nasalance protocol standardization" (2004). LSU Master's Theses. 742. https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_theses/742 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at LSU Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in LSU Master's Theses by an authorized graduate school editor of LSU Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. LOUISIANA STATE UNIVERSITY NASALANCE PROTOCOL STANDARDIZATION A Thesis Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College In partial fulfillment of the Requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in The Department of Communication Disorders by Kathryn Ruth Kendrick B.A., Louisiana State University, 2002 May 2004 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I was amazed at how inviting, responsive, and supportive my committee was during this experience. Many times students think of a thesis and avoid pursuing projects like this due to the amount of work and anticipated struggles they may endure. I have found that if you have a strong and supportive committee the experience can be a delightful one. My committee was welcoming for questions, editing, and discussion, they provided me with advice, resources, contacts, and were able to interact with this project from many different perspectives, which resulted in a well-rounded and well-supported final project. First, I would like to thank Dr. Amelia Hudson, who was my major professor, assistant, and teacher. Dr. Hudson was a guide and mentor during this entire experience. Without her extensive knowledge and assistance this project would not have been possible. I would like to recognize and thank: Dr. Paul Hoffman, who assisted me during several portions of the paper from beginning to end, Dr. Hugh Buckingham, who brought the linguistic insight to assist my comprehension and rationale of particular studies and correlations between my results and previous research, and Dr. Paul Blanchet, who provided assistance and resources to facilitate my experience. To my committee, I would like to say thanks for such a wonderful learning experience. Becoming familiar with the literature and investigating research in my field of interest has been very rewarding and forthcoming. This experience has given me the ii opportunity to assist in collecting research and current data to aid in the effectiveness of Speech-Language Pathology. I would like to thank Sonja Pruitt for her support and assistance in providing participants and advice for this experiment. Lastly and most importantly, I would like to thank my parents, Tina and Terry Kendrick, who gave advice, praise, and support throughout this project. I would also like to thank Jill Stansbury for her encouragement, listening skills, and her friendship, as she had to listen to me on many occasions. Thank you. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS………………………………………………………………..ii LIST OF TABLES……………………………………………………………………….vi ABSTRACT……..……………………………………………………………………....vii CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION………………….……………………………………..1 2 REVIEW OF LITERATURE……..………………………………………3 Creation of Resonance Instrumentation………...……………...….3 Nasometer…………………………….…………………………...4 Nasometric Validity………………………………………...……..6 Normative Studies……………………………………………........9 Children…………………………………………………....9 Adults…………………………………………………….11 Elderly Speakers………………………………………....12 Gender……………………………………………………………12 Dialect and Language……………………………………………22 Resonance Evaluation……………………………………………24 Vowels…………………………………………………………...26 Vowels and Duplicated Syllables…………………………….….28 Reading Passages………………………………………………...31 Pros and Cons of Using Vowels and Duplicated Syllables……...33 LSU Protocol………………………...……………………….….34 Purpose…………………………………………………….…….37 3 METHODS……………………………………………………………....39 Participants……..………………………………………………..39 Instrumentation…………………………………………………..39 Stimuli…………………………………………………………...40 Procedure…………………………………………………….......40 Data Analysis.……………………………………………..……..41 4 RESULTS ………..……………………………………………………...42 Nasalance Values for Individual Tasks… ……………………....42 Nasalance Values According to Gender…………………………45 Prediction of Connected Speech Values from the Speech Tasks..48 5 DISCUSSION……...…………………………………………………….51 Nasalance Values………………….……………………………..51 Vowels…...………………………………………………51 iv Consonants……………………………………………….52 Gender……………………………………………………………53 Correlation……………………………………………………….54 Conclusion……………………………………………………….56 REFERENCES…………………………………………………………………………..57 VITA….………………………………………………………………………………….60 v LIST OF TABLES 1. Nasalance Values for Sustained Vowel Production averaged across all Participants.....................................................................................................…...…....43 2. Nasalance Values for CV Reduplication averaged across all participants…………...44 . 3. Nasalance Value for the Rainbow Passage averaged across all participants………....45 4. Mean of the Maximum Nasalance Value for the Rainbow Passage averaged across all participants…………………………………………………………………….…45 5. Nasalance Values associated with each task produced by gender …………………..46 6. Correlation of each Sustained Vowel Production with the Rainbow Passage……….48 7. Correlation of each CV Reduplication with the Rainbow Passage……………….….48 vi ABSTRACT It was the purpose of this study to obtain nasalance values using the Nasometer and a resonance evaluation created at the Louisiana State University (LSU) Speech and Hearing Clinic. The Nasometer was used to measure the amount of nasal acoustic energy in the speech of 40 normal young adults during sustained vowel production, consonant vowel reduplications, and connected speech using the Rainbow Passage. Means and standard deviations are presented for the individual speech tasks and according to gender. Nasalance values for the sustained vowels were significantly higher for the high front vowel /i/ than any other vowel, and the lowest nasalance value was obtained by the high back vowel /u/. The vowels in descending order of nasalance values were as follows: /i, ae, a, u/. No significant gender differences were found for sustained vowel production or the Rainbow Passage. Correlation values indicated that three phonemes /u, k, g/ from the resonance protocol were the best predictors of nasalance according to the reading passage. The results are discussed with regard to potential reasons why minimal gender differences were found, why the phonemes were found to be the best predictors of nasalance, and how the LSU protocol can be modified to provide a more effective and efficient resonance evaluation. vii CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION There is considerable information available concerning the acoustic characteristics of abnormal and normal resonance, as well as clinical assessment and management of resonance impairments. Most normative data were collected from English speaking Caucasian American children and adults using reading passages as stimuli (e.g., Rainbow, Zoo, and Nasal Passages). The Rainbow Passage contains a mixture of oral and nasal consonants in the approximate proportion found in standard American English, also known as a phonetically balanced (PB) passage. The Zoo Passage contains only oral speech sounds and was designed to assess the degree of hypernasality in a subject’s speech. The Nasal Passage contains 35% nasal consonants, which is three times greater than the frequency of occurrence of nasals in standard American English and was designed to test for the presence of hyponasality in a person’s speech (Seaver, Dalston, Leeper, & Adams, 1991). There are limited data concerning individual vowel and consonant nasalance values. It was the purpose of this study to collect normative data on Caucasian young adults using the Nasometer 6200 (Kay Elemetrics Corp., Pine Brook, NJ.) and the resonance protocol created at the Louisiana State University (LSU) Speech and Hearing Clinic. The LSU resonance protocol systematically measures the nasalance in the production of each of the phonemes, which are organized in hierarchical order from the least to most mechanical stress each test item places on the velopharyngeal (VP) system. The protocol begins with productions of sustained vowels, which are periodic sounds requiring low intraoral pressures and, thus, are presumed to be less taxing on the VP 1 system. The vowels included are: (high – low and front – back /i, I, e, E, ae, u, ʊ, o, ɔ, a, ʌ, ɝ/). The protocol continues with consonant vowel (CV) reduplications in which the neutral vowel /ʌ/ is paired with approximants /w, j, l, r/ (e.g., wʌ, wʌ, wʌ ), plosives /p, b, t, d, k, g/, fricatives /ɵ, ð, f, v, s, z, ʃ, ʒ/, and affricatives /ʧ, ʤ /. The LSU protocol uses the mean to represent nasalance during production of sustained vowels and connected speech using the Rainbow Passage and the mean of the maximum values to represent nasalance during consonant production. Collectively, these utterances demand a range of VP control capabilities. It is the purpose of this study to obtain normative data for all speech tasks, the significance of each speech task, and/or redundancy within the protocol.