Order Affects Clear and Loud Speech Response.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this investigation was to examine the impact of instruction order on the speech production response when adopting higher effort speaking styles, specifically loud and clear speech. METHOD: Speech intensity, lip aperture range, and speech rate data were collected from 24 talkers who repeated the utterance "Buy Bobby a puppy" using habitual, clear, and loud speech. Participants were assigned in quasi-random fashion to one of two groups: a Clear-Loud Group (11 participants; order: habitual-clear-loud) or a Loud-Clear Group (13 participants; order: habitual-loud-clear). RESULTS: Talkers in the Clear-Loud Group exhibited higher speech intensity during the loud style compared with those who performed the Loud-Clear Group. Furthermore, talkers in the Clear-Loud Group retained the increases lip aperture range and reductions in speech rate associated with the clear style when producing the loud style. Conversely, talkers in the Loud-Clear Group exhibited significant increases in lip aperture range between the habitual and loud styles and between the loud and clear styles. Additionally, the Loud-Clear Group exhibited a reduction in speech rate only during the clear style, as no differences in speech rate were observed between the habitual and loud styles. CONCLUSIONS: These findings may suggest that producing a higher effort style leads to carry-over effects in subsequent styles. Future research should investigate factors that moderate the degree of order effects for both research and clinical purposes. For instance, if generalizable, the compounding carry-over effects may prove advantageous for certain clinical populations.

Quantifying Spatial and Temporal Variability of Clear and Loud Speech Produced While Performing a Concurrent Visuomotor Task.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this research note was to quantify the impact of concurrent performance of an attention-demanding secondary task on utterance-to-utterance movement variability associated with higher effort speaking styles, namely, clear and loud speech. METHOD: Lip and jaw kinematics collected as part of a prior study were analyzed. Participants repeated "Buy Bobby a puppy" using habitual, loud, and clear speech styles in isolation and while performing a secondary tracking task. The lip aperture (LA) signal was segmented based on opening and closing gestures associated with the utterance. The standard deviation of each segment duration was calculated to quantify temporal variability. To quantify spatial variability, each segment was first time normalized. The mean standard deviation of the overlapping time-normalized LA amplitudes was computed for each segment from the repetitions produced in each speech style and condition (speaking in isolation vs. speaking while tracking). A relative measure of spatial variation was also computed to account for the potential impact of articulatory scaling. RESULTS: Clear speech was associated with greater temporal and spatial variability than the habitual and loud styles. In the habitual style, talkers also exhibited a slight reduction in absolute spatial variability when speaking while tracking compared to speaking in isolation. The reduction in absolute spatial variability was likely associated with the concomitant reduction in LA range of motion, as there was no change in the relative spatial variability between conditions. CONCLUSION: The current investigation expands prior work by quantifying spatial and temporal characteristics of different speaking styles performed in isolation and while concurrently performing an attention-demanding visuomotor task.

Tracking the Costs of Clear and Loud Speech: Interactions Between Speech Motor Control and Concurrent Visuomotor Tracking.

Purpose Prior work has demonstrated that competing tasks impact habitual speech production. The purpose of this investigation was to quantify the extent to which clear and loud speech are affected by concurrent performance of an attention-demanding task. Method Speech kinematics and acoustics were collected while participants spoke using habitual, loud, and clear speech styles. The styles were performed in isolation and while performing a secondary tracking task. Results Compared to the habitual style, speakers exhibited expected increases in lip aperture range of motion and speech intensity for the clear and loud styles. During concurrent visuomotor tracking, there was a decrease in lip aperture range of motion and speech intensity for the habitual style. Tracking performance during habitual speech did not differ from single-task tracking. For loud and clear speech, speakers retained the gains in speech intensity and range of motion, respectively, while concurrently tracking. A reduction in tracking performance was observed during concurrent loud and clear speech, compared to tracking alone. Conclusions These data suggest that loud and clear speech may help to mitigate motor interference associated with concurrent performance of an attention-demanding task. Additionally, reductions in tracking accuracy observed during concurrent loud and clear speech may suggest that these higher effort speaking styles require greater attentional resources than habitual speech.

Effects of Concurrent Manual Task Performance on Connected Speech Acoustics in Individuals With Parkinson Disease.

Purpose Prior investigations suggest that simultaneous performance of more than 1 motor-oriented task may exacerbate speech motor deficits in individuals with Parkinson disease (PD). The purpose of the current investigation was to examine the extent to which performing a low-demand manual task affected the connected speech in individuals with and without PD. Method Individuals with PD and neurologically healthy controls performed speech tasks (reading and extemporaneous speech tasks) and an oscillatory manual task (a counterclockwise circle-drawing task) in isolation (single-task condition) and concurrently (dual-task condition). Results Relative to speech task performance, no changes in speech acoustics were observed for either group when the low-demand motor task was performed with the concurrent reading tasks. Speakers with PD exhibited a significant decrease in pause duration between the single-task (speech only) and dual-task conditions for the extemporaneous speech task, whereas control participants did not exhibit changes in any speech production variable between the single- and dual-task conditions. Conclusions Overall, there were little to no changes in speech production when a low-demand oscillatory motor task was performed with concurrent reading. For the extemporaneous task, however, individuals with PD exhibited significant changes when the speech and manual tasks were performed concurrently, a pattern that was not observed for control speakers. Supplemental Material https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.8637008.