Home Your basket
• Two cases of primary mali...
   Price 8.50 €
• Reconstruction after hemi...
   Price 14.00 €
• Assessing efficacy of voi...
   Price 5.50 €
• Interest of the chest CT ...
   Price 10.50 €
• Metastatic angiosarcoma t...
   Price 5.50 €
• Partial allotransplantati...
   Price 10.50 €
• Smile "forced" smile vers...
   Price 10.50 €
• Kikuchi-Fujimoto’s diseas...
   Price 10.50 €
• Functional results of vel...
   Price 5.50 €
• The effects of pregnancy ...
   Price 14.00 €
• An unusual case of intrat...
   Price 5.50 €
• Advantages of combined th...
   Price 10.50 €
• Botulinum toxin, descript...
   Price 12.50 €
• Unsteadiness and drunkenn...
   Price 10.50 €
• Rhinitis and allergy test...
   Price 8.50 €
• Mucormycosis – early diag...
   Price 10.50 €
• Giant laryngeal sarcomato...
   Price 12.00 €
• Pharyngeal pouch surgery ...
   Price 5.50 €
• CT scan, MR imaging and a...
   Price 10.50 €
• Enlarged marginal incisio...
   Price 10.50 €
• Value of the preservation...
   Price 14.00 €
• Nasal polyposis and olfac...
   Price 10.50 €
• Mycobacterial cervical ly...
   Price 10.50 €
• Drop weld thermal injurie...
   Price 8.50 €
• Supra and infra hyoid mid...
   Price 10.50 €
• Identification and locali...
   Price 8.50 €
• The importance of the sta...
   Price 5.50 €
• Social consequence of a d...
   Price 10.50 €
• Tumours of the accessory ...
   Price 10.50 €
• Recurrent mandibular amel...
   Price 12.50 €
• Aneurysmal bone cyst of t...
   Price 5.50 €

Total Order 298.50 €

contents
2019
   N# 1 |
2018
   N# 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
2017
   N# 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
2016
   N# 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
2015
   N# 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
2014
   N# 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
2013
   N# 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
2012
   N# 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
2011
   N# 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
2010
   N# 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
2009
   N# 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
2008
   N# 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
2007
   N# 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
2006
   N# 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
2005
   N# | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
2004
   N# 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
2003
   N# 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
2002
   N# 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
2001
   N# 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
2000
   N# | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
1999
   N# 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
1998
   N# 1 | 2 | 3 | 5 |
1997
   N# 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
1996
   N# 4 | 5 |

Click on the number of the review to see the content
Teaching bulletin CME
List of all teaching bulletins CME.
Editor reading committee
Editor reading committee.
To publish...
Instructions for authors
Archives Press and Books
Select of books and press articles.
Mailing list
News information letter.
Subscription prices


If you wish to adjust the size of the displayed characters, click in the high menu on "Your account" and choose the desired size.



  Contents > Previous page > Article detail print Order
o Issue N# 1 - 2011 o

PHONIATRICS

Context influence on the perception of dysphonia: when the knowledge of the patient’s clinical state can modify the results of perceptual voice quality assess­ment


Authors : Ghio A, Merienne S, Giovanni A. (Marseille)

Ref. : Rev Laryngol Otol Rhinol. 2011;132,1:9-17.

Article published in french
Downloadable PDF document french



Summary : Two experiments were conducted to examine how knowledge of the patient’s clinical state affects the results of perceptual voice quality assessment performed by specialists in voice therapy. This study involved 53 patients with a dysphonia. For each speaker, we selected a pair of recordings made in different circumstances. These pairs of voices were presented to seven listeners (ENT surgeons or speech therapists). The task was to perceptually compare the severity of the dysphonia between the 2 recordings of the pair. Stimuli were presented first in a blind test, then several weeks later with accompanying information about the patient; in particular, whether the voice was pre- or post- treatment was explicitly specified. We balanced this artificial contextual information in order to (α) reinforce the blind judgment (for example, voices perceived as better in the blind test were indicated as post treatment); (β) be inconsistent (in a clinical point of view) compared to the blind test (for example, voices perceived as more disordered during the blind test were indicated as post treatment). Results revealed that in the clinical-consistent context α, the preference was amplified in a significant way. In clinical-inconsistent condition β, we observed an inhibition effect or a change of decision. In this condi­tion, the judgment was more dependant on the contextual information (pre/post treatment) than on the auditory sensation obtained in blind condition. These findings are discussed with reference to results in the literature on visual, olfactory or audi­tory perception in context. In the frame of perceptual voice assess­ment, results revealed that only blind tests can provide reliable results.


Price : 10.50 €      order
|


Subscribe online - Pay by credit card!


© Copyright 1999-2024 - Revue de Laryngologie   Réalisation - Hébergement ELIDEE