How Do Laryngeal and Respiratory Functions Contribute to Differentiate Actors/Actresses and Untrained Voices?
Author
dc.contributor.author
Master, Suely
Author
dc.contributor.author
Guzmán Noriega, Marco
Author
dc.contributor.author
Azócar, María Josefina
Author
dc.contributor.author
Muñoz, Daniel
Author
dc.contributor.author
Bortnem, Cori
Admission date
dc.date.accessioned
2015-07-09T19:26:15Z
Available date
dc.date.available
2015-07-09T19:26:15Z
Publication date
dc.date.issued
2014
Cita de ítem
dc.identifier.citation
Journal of Voice, Vol. 29, No. 3, pp. 333-345
en_US
Identifier
dc.identifier.other
doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2014.09.003
Identifier
dc.identifier.uri
https://repositorio.uchile.cl/handle/2250/131904
General note
dc.description
Artículo de publicación ISI
en_US
Abstract
dc.description.abstract
Summary: Purpose. The present study aimed to compare actors/actresses’s voices and vocally trained subjects
through aerodynamic and electroglottographic (EGG) analyses. We hypothesized that glottal and breathing functions
would reflect technical and physiological differences between vocally trained and untrained subjects.
Methods. Forty participants with normal voices participated in this study (20 professional theater actors and 20 untrained
participants). In each group, 10 male and 10 female subjects were assessed. All participants underwent aerodynamic
and EGG assessment of voice. From the Phonatory Aerodynamic System, three protocols were used: comfortable
sustained phonation with EGG, voice efficiency with EGG, and running speech. Contact quotient was calculated from
EGG. All phonatory tasks were produced at three different loudness levels. Mean sound pressure level and fundamental
frequency were also assessed. Univariate, multivariate, and correlation statistical analyses were performed.
Results. Main differences between vocally trained and untrained participants were found in the following variables:
mean sound pressure level, phonatory airflow, subglottic pressure, inspiratory airflow duration, inspiratory airflow, and
inspiratory volume. These variables were greater for trained participants. Mean pitch was found to be lower for trained
voices.
Conclusions. The glottal source seemed to have a weak contribution when differentiating the training status in
speaking voice. More prominent changes between vocally trained and untrained participants are demonstrated in
respiratory-related variables. These findings may be related to better management of breathing function (better breath
support).