An Assessment of Different Praat Versions for Acoustic Measures Analyzed Automatically by VoiceEvalU8 and Manually by Two Raters.
Elizabeth U Grillo, Jeremy Wolfberg
PMID 33384248WHAT IT FOUND
For sustained /a/, acoustic measures matched across different Praat versions and manual vs automatic analysis.
For connected speech and phrases, mean values often differed, especially for CPPS and pitch variability. Use the same Praat version and settings for a patient’s pre and post treatment comparisons.
Key findings
01Acoustic measures for sustained /a/ showed no significant differences between automatic VoiceEvalU8 analysis and manual analysis using three different Praat versions.
02For the phrase 'we were away a year ago', mean values for SD of f0 and CPPS differed significantly between the automatic analysis and at least one manual analysis.
03For the 15-s speech sample, mean values for f0 and SD of f0 differed significantly across the three analysis methods.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for SLPs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
The study included only 19 vocally healthy females, so results may not generalize to individuals with voice disorders or other demographics. Day 2 and Day 3 data were excluded due to technical and compliance issues, reducing the dataset. The study compared specific versions of Praat; newer or older versions might behave differently. Manual analysis was performed by only two raters, which may not capture the full range of variability in clinical manual analysis.
The easy way to misread this
Do not assume that changes in acoustic measures like CPPS or pitch variability during connected speech are due to patient progress. These values differed significantly depending on the Praat version and analysis method used, so ensure you are using the same software and settings for all pre and post treatment comparisons.