认知负荷对发声运动控制的影响:基于模型分析的功能性发声障碍与健康嗓音个体研究
Effects of Cognitive Load on Vocal Motor Control: A Model-Based Analysis in Individuals With Hyperfunctional and Healthy Voices.
文献信息
| PMID | 42814089 |
|---|---|
| 原文 | 在 PubMed 查看原文 ↗ |
| 发表日期 | 2026 |
| 作者 | Rocío B Ortega |
| 作者单位 | Department of Electronic Engineering, Universidad Técnica Federico Santa María, Valparaíso, Chile. |
| 期刊 | Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR |
| SCI 分区 | Q1 |
| IF | 2.9 |
| 研究类型 | 临床研究 · 临床 |
| 所属专科 | 咽喉科 |
中文摘要
目的: 本研究通过整合声学测量与基于模型方法推导的生物力学轨迹,探讨认知负荷(CL)如何影响发声运动控制。目的是确定与健康对照(HC)说话者相比,功能性发声障碍(VH)说话者是否在喉部控制中表现出不同的调节模式。
方法: 分析女性说话者(63名VH和62名HC说话者)执行Stroop任务时的录音。提取基频(fo)和声压级(SPL)的轨迹,并将其作为计算模型的输入,该模型估计环甲肌(aCT)和甲杓肌(aTA)的激活以及声门下压力(PS)。声学和模型推导的测量值被分段并使用混合效应模型进行分析。
结果: 在声学和生物力学特征中发现了显著的条件下效应,fo-aCT和SPL-PS在各段和组间呈现平行模式。未观察到aTA的一致差异。最强的效应出现在SPL中,在CL下增加,尤其是在VH说话者中,PS显示出类似但较弱的趋势。对于fo和aCT,在任务开始时出现了相反的组模式:HC说话者显示轻微下降,而VH说话者显示增加。
结论: CL下声学与估计的生物力学调节之间的对应关系支持了这种基于模型的方法在喉部运动行为的生理可解释推断中的实用性。VH说话者显示出aCT和PS控制的更大调节,而aTA没有系统性变化,表明与唤醒相关的喉部紧张主要影响更表浅的控制维度。
英文摘要
PURPOSE: This study examined how cognitive load (CL) influences vocal motor control by integrating acoustic measures with biomechanical trajectories derived from a model-based approach. The aim was to determine whether speakers with vocal hyperfunction (VH) exhibit distinct modulation patterns in laryngeal control compared with healthy control (HC) speakers.
METHOD: Recordings from female speakers (63 with VH and 62 HC speakers) performing a Stroop task were analyzed. Trajectories of fundamental frequency (fo) and sound pressure level (SPL) were extracted and used as inputs to a computational model that estimated cricothyroid (aCT) and thyroarytenoid (aTA) muscle activations, as well as subglottal pressure (PS). Acoustic and model-derived measures were segmented and analyzed using mixed-effects models.
RESULTS: Significant condition effects were found across acoustic and biomechanical features, with parallel patterns in fo - aCT and SPL - PS across segments and groups. No consistent differences were observed for aTA. The strongest effects occurred in SPL, which increased under CL, especially among speakers with VH, with PS showing a similar but weaker trend. For fo and aCT, opposite group patterns emerged at task onset: HC speakers showed slight decreases, whereas those with VH showed increases.
CONCLUSIONS: The correspondence between acoustic and estimated biomechanical modulations under CL supports the utility of this model-based approach for physiologically interpretable inference of laryngeal motor behavior. Speakers with VH showed greater modulation of aCT and PS control, with no systematic changes in aTA, suggesting that arousal-related laryngeal tension primarily affects more superficial control dimension.