Abstract
The pitch perturbation technique is a validated technique that has been used for over 30 years to understand how people control their voice. This technique involves altering a person’s voice pitch in real-time while they produce a vowel (commonly, a prolonged /a/ sound). Although post-task changes in the voice have been observed in several studies (e.g., a change in mean F0 across the duration of the experiment), the potential for using the pitch perturbation technique as a training tool for voice pitch regulation and/or modification has not been explored. The present study examined changes in event related potentials (ERPs) and voice pitch in three groups of subjects due to altered voice auditory feedback following a brief, four-day training period. Participants in the opposing group were trained to change their voice F0 in the opposite direction of a pitch perturbation stimulus. Participants in the following group were trained to change their voice F0 in the same direction as the pitch perturbation stimulus. Participants in the non-varying group did not voluntarily change their pitch, but instead were asked to hold their voice constant when they heard pitch perturbations. Results showed that all three types of training affected the ERPs (N1 peak latency, P2 peak latency, and P2 peak amplitude) and the response latency and magnitude of the voice pitch shift response in the baseline, “hold your voice pitch steady” task (an indicator of voice pitch regulation). These results demonstrate that participation in pitch-shifted auditory feedback tasks even for brief periods of time can modulate the automatic tendency to compensate for alterations in voice pitch feedback and has therapeutic potential.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This research was supported by a grant from the National Institutes of Health, including NIDCD R01DC006243 to CL and R03DC013883 to SP (https://www.nidcd.nih.gov/). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
Participant recruitment and testing procedures were approved by the Northwestern University Institutional Review Board.
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
Data cannot be shared publicly because of the large size of data files. Data are available from the Northwestern University Institutional Data Access (contact via irb@northwestern.edu) for researchers who meet the criteria for access to confidential data.
