↓ Skip to main content

Acoustic characteristics of the metallic voice quality

Overview of attention for article published in CoDAS, February 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
19 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Acoustic characteristics of the metallic voice quality
Published in
CoDAS, February 2015
DOI 10.1590/2317-1782/20152014159
Pubmed ID
Authors

Congeta Bruniere Xavier Fadel, Ana Paula Dassie-Leite, Rosane Sampaio Santos, Marcelo de Oliveira Rosa, Jair Mendes Marques

Abstract

To characterize the fundamental frequency and the frequency of the formants F1, F2, F3, and F4 from vocal emissions of amateur singers with metallic voice quality. There were 60 amateur female singers aged between 18 and 60 years old; 30 women with metallic voice quality forming the study group (SG) and 30 women without such a vocal quality forming control group (CG). The sample was selected through voice screening confirmed by reviewers after reaching a consensus. Regarding data collection, sustained vowel emissions in usual tone and at two predetermined frequencies, by which the values of F0 and frequency of the formants F1, F2, F3, and F4 were obtained, were recorded and analyzed. Comparing the emissions in usual tone, no difference for F0 was found, but the values of the formants F2, F3, and F4 were higher in the SG. In the preestablished tones, there was a difference between the two groups in the formants F3 and F4 for both tones. It is possible to characterize metallic voice quality as a normal fundamental frequency, with increasing frequency of the F2 formant, and values of frequencies of formants F2, F3, and F4 higher when compared to the CG.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 19 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Denmark 1 5%
Unknown 18 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 21%
Student > Bachelor 2 11%
Researcher 2 11%
Student > Master 2 11%
Professor 1 5%
Other 2 11%
Unknown 6 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 3 16%
Social Sciences 2 11%
Arts and Humanities 1 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 5%
Environmental Science 1 5%
Other 2 11%
Unknown 9 47%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 17 May 2024.
All research outputs
#17,729,864
of 25,988,468 outputs
Outputs from CoDAS
#1
of 92 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#225,478
of 363,788 outputs
Outputs of similar age from CoDAS
#3
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,988,468 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 92 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 1.9. This one is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 363,788 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.