Intelligibility and Listening Effort of Spanish Oesophageal Speech
Source abstract
Abstract
Communication is a huge challenge for oesophageal speakers, be it for interactions with fellow humans or with digital voice assistants. We aim to quantify these communication challenges (both human–human and human–machine interactions) by measuring intelligibility and Listening Effort (LE) of Oesophageal Speech (OS) in comparison to Healthy Laryngeal Speech (HS). We conducted two listening tests (one web-based, the other in laboratory settings) to collect these measurements. Participants performed a sentence recognition and LE rating task in each test. Intelligibility, calculated as Word Error Rate, showed significant correlation with self-reported LE ratings. Speaker type (healthy or oesophageal) had a major effect on intelligibility and effort. More LE was reported for OS compared to HS even when OS intelligibility was close to HS. Listeners familiar with OS reported less effort when listening to OS compared to nonfamiliar listeners. However, such advantage of familiarity was not observed for intelligibility. Automatic speech recognition scores were higher for OS compared to HS.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Voice and Speech Disorders · Hearing Loss and Rehabilitation · Phonetics and Phonology Research
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Aholab Signal Processing Laboratory, University of the Basque Country (UPV/EHU), 48013 Bilbao, Spain
Branch Hearing, Speech and Audio Technology, Fraunhofer Institute for Digital Media Technology, 26129 Oldenburg, Germany
Funding
H2020 Marie Skłodowska-Curie Actions · Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness with FEDER support · Basque Government
References (48)
Show source-provided references
1. Speech rehabilitation after total laryngectomy10.1080/000164802760057716 ↗
2. Voice and speech after laryngectomy10.1080/02699200400026975 ↗
3. Weinberg, B. (1986). Acoustical Properties of Esophageal and Tracheoesophageal Speech. Laryngectomee Rehabilitation, College Hill Press.
4. Acoustic and perceptual characteristics of esophageal and tracheoesophageal speech production10.1016/S0021-9924(99)00030-1 ↗
5. Postlaryngectomy quality-of-life dimensions identified by patients and health care professionals10.1016/S0002-9610(05)80720-2 ↗
6. Speech recognition by machines and humans10.1016/S0167-6393(97)00021-6 ↗
7. Hearing impairment and cognitive energy: The framework for understanding effortful listening (FUEL)10.1097/AUD.0000000000000312 ↗
8. Ratings of intelligibility of esophageal and tracheoesophageal speech10.1016/0021-9924(86)90008-0 ↗
9. The measurement of speech intelligibility
10. Andersen, A.H., de Haan, J.M., Tan, Z.H., and Jensen, J. (2017, January 5–9). A non-intrusive short-time objective intelligibility measure. Proceedings of the 2017 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP), New Orleans, LA, USA.10.1109/ICASSP.2017.7953125 ↗
11. A data-driven non-intrusive measure of speech quality and intelligibility10.1016/j.specom.2016.03.005 ↗
12. An evaluation of intrusive instrumental intelligibility metrics10.1109/TASLP.2018.2856374 ↗
13. A comparison of techniques for measuring intelligibility of dysarthric speech10.1016/0021-9924(78)90024-2 ↗
14. Sentence repetition test: Updated norms and clinical utility10.1207/S15324826AN0703_6 ↗
15. Reaching over the gap: A review of efforts to link human and automatic speech recognition research10.1016/j.specom.2007.01.009 ↗
16. PEAKS—A system for the automatic evaluation of voice and speech disorders10.1016/j.specom.2009.01.004 ↗
17. Middag, C., Bocklet, T., Martens, J.P., and Nöth, E. (2011, January 27–31). Combining phonological and acoustic ASR-free features for pathological speech intelligibility assessment. Proceedings of the 12th Annual Conference of the International Speech Communication Association, Florence, Italy.10.21437/Interspeech.2011-752 ↗
18. Middag, C., Martens, J.P., Van Nuffelen, G., and de Bodt, M. (2009, January 14–16). Dia: A tool for objective intelligibility assessment of pathological speech. Proceedings of the 6th International Workshop on Models and Analysis of Vocal Emissions for Biomedical Applications, Florence, Italy.10.21437/Interspeech.2008-481 ↗
19. Voice intelligibility in patients who have undergone laryngectomies10.1044/jshr.3803.564 ↗
20. Acoustical analysis of Spanish vowels produced by laryngectomized subjects10.1044/1092-4388(2001/077) ↗
21. Mantilla, A., Pérez-Meana, H., Mata, D., Angeles, C., Alvarado, J., and Cabrera, L. (2006, January 21–24). Recognition of vowel segments in Spanish esophageal speech using hidden Markov models. Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Computing, Mexico City, Mexico.10.1109/CIC.2006.58 ↗
22. Listening effort and fatigue: What exactly are we measuring? A British society of audiology cognition in hearing special interest group ‘white paper’10.3109/14992027.2014.890296 ↗
23. Listening effort and speech intelligibility in listening situations affected by noise and reverberation10.1121/1.4897398 ↗
24. Listening effort during sentence processing is increased for non-native listeners: A pupillometry study10.3389/fnins.2018.00152 ↗
25. Listening effort and accented speech
26. Listening effort and fatigue in school-age children with and without hearing loss10.1044/1092-4388(2002/046) ↗
27. Contributing factors to listener effort for dysarthric speech
28. Association between objective measurement of the speech intelligibility of young people with dysarthria and listener ratings of ease of understanding10.3109/17549507.2014.927922 ↗
29. Listener effort and response time when transcribing words spoken by children with dysarthria
30. Acceptability ratings of normal, esophageal, and artificial larynx speech10.1044/jshr.1604.608 ↗
31. Listener effort for highly intelligible tracheoesophageal speech10.1016/j.jcomdis.2012.01.001 ↗
32. Raman, S., Hernaez, I., Navas, E., and Serrano, L. (2018, January 21–23). Listening to laryngectomees: A study of intelligibility and self-reported listening effort of Spanish oesophageal speech. Proceedings of the IberSPEECH 2018, Barcelona, Spain.10.21437/IberSPEECH.2018-23 ↗
33. Sainz, I., Erro, D., Navas, E., Hernáez, I., Sanchez, J., Saratxaga, I., and Odriozola, I. (2012, January 21–27). Versatile speech databases for high quality synthesis for Basque. Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC), Istanbul, Turkey.
34. Erro, D., Hernáez, I., Navas, E., Alonso, A., Arzelus, H., Jauk, I., Hy, N.Q., Magarinos, C., Pérez-Ramón, R., and Sulír, M. (July, January 9). ZureTTS: Online platform for obtaining personalized synthetic voices. Proceedings of the eNTERFACE’14, Bilbao, Spain.
35. Sesma, A., and Moreno, A. (2019, August 07). Corpuscrt 1.0: Diseno de Corpus Orales Equilibrados. Computer Program. Available online: http://gps-tsc.upc.es/veu/personal/sesma/CorpusCrt.php3.
36. Erro, D., Hernaez, I., Alonso, A., Garcí-Lorenzo, D., Navas, E., Ye, J., Arzelus, H., Jauk, I., Hy, N.Q., and Magariñ, C. (2015, January 6–10). Personalized synthetic voices for speaking impaired: Website and app. Proceedings of the 16th Annual Conference of the International Speech Communication Association, Dresden, Germany.10.21437/Interspeech.2015-314 ↗
37. Tits, N. (2017). Exploring the Parameters Describing the Quality and Intelligibility of Alaryngeal Voices. [Master’s Thesis, University of Mons].
38. Tracheoesophageal speech: A dedicated objective acoustic assessment10.1016/j.csl.2014.07.003 ↗
39. Preece, D.A. (2014). Latin squares, Latin cubes, Latin rectangles. Wiley StatsRef: Statistics Reference Online, Wiley Online Library.10.1002/9781118445112.stat00867 ↗
40. Povey, D., Ghoshal, A., Boulianne, G., Burget, L., Glembek, O., Goel, N., Hannemann, M., Motlicek, P., Qian, Y., and Schwarz, P. (2011, January 11–15). The Kaldi speech recognition toolkit. Proceedings of the IEEE Workshop on Automatic Speech Recognition and Understanding, Hilton Waikoloa Village, HI, USA.
41. Rath, S.P., Povey, D., Veselỳ, K., and Cernockỳ, J. (2013, January 25–29). Improved feature processing for deep neural networks. Proceedings of the 14th Annual Conference of the International Speech Communication Association, Lyon, France.10.21437/Interspeech.2013-48 ↗
42. Serrano, L., Tavarez, D., Odriozola, I., Hernaez, I., and Saratxaga, I. (2016, January 23–25). Aholab system for Albayzin 2016 search-on-speech evaluation. Proceedings of the IberSPEECH 2016, Lisbon, Portugal.
43. Serrano, L., Tavarez, D., Sarasola, X., Raman, S., Saratxaga, I., Navas, E., and Hernaez, I. (2018, January 21–23). LSTM Based Voice Conversion for Laryngectomees. Proceedings of the IberSPEECH 2018, Barcelona, Spain.10.21437/IberSPEECH.2018-26 ↗
44. Binary codes capable of correcting deletions, insertions, and reversals
45. Polityko, E. (2018, February 20). Word Error Rate. Available online: https://www.mathworks.com/examples/matlab/community/19873-word-error-rate.
46. JASP Team (2018, February 20). JASP (Version 0.8.6); Computer Software. Available online: https://jasp-stats.org/.
47. The flankers task and response competition: A useful tool for investigating a variety of cognitive problems10.1080/13506289508401726 ↗
48. The digit span backwards task10.1027/1015-5759/a000223 ↗