PubMed · 5794884
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
T E Walsh. 1969. Reporting results.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/5794884/
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
It has been shown that visual display systems of intonation can be employed beneficially in teaching intonation to persons with deafness and in teaching the intonation of a foreign language. In this paper, the question is addressed whether important audible differences between two pitch contours correspond with visually conspicuous differences between displayed pitch contours. If visual feedback of intonation is to be effective in teaching situations, such correspondence must exist. In two experiments, phoneticians rated the dissimilarity of two pitch contours. In the first experiment they rated the two pitch contours auditorily (i.e., by listening to two resynthesized utterances). In the second, they rated the same two pitch contours visually (i.e., by looking at the two contours displayed on a computer screen). The results indicate why visual feedback may be very effective in intonation training if pitch contours are displayed in such a way that only auditorily relevant features are represented.
It has been shown that visual display systems of intonation can be employed beneficially in teaching intonation to persons with deafness and in teaching the intonation of a foreign language. In current training situations the correctness of a reproduced pitch contour is rated either by the teacher or automatically. In the latter case an algorithm mostly estimates the maximum deviation from an example contour. In game-like exercises, for instance, the pupil has to produce a pitch contour within the displayed floor and ceiling of a "tunnel" with a preadjusted height. In an experiment described in the companion paper, phoneticians had rated the dissimilarity of two pitch contours both auditorily, by listening to two resynthesized utterances, and visually, by looking at two pitch contours displayed on a computer screen. A test is reported in which these dissimilarity ratings were compared with automatic ratings obtained with this tunnel measure and with three other measures, the mean distance, the root-mean-square (RMS) distance, and the correlation coefficient. The most frequently used tunnel measure appeared to have the weakest correlation with the ratings by the phoneticians. In general, the automatic ratings obtained with the correlation coefficient showed the strongest correlation with the perceptual ratings. A disadvantage of this measure, however, may be that it normalizes for the range of the pitch contours. If range is important, as in intonation teaching to persons with deafness, the mean distance or the RMS distance are the best physical measures for automatic training of intonation.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.