جنسیت و رتبه بندی مردسالاری و زن سالاری

Tracheoesophageal (TE) speech is frequently characterized as low pitched and hoarse. In laryngeal speakers, these features are most often associated with males. Because lower pitch and hoarseness are anticipated for male and female TE speakers, one might predict that females are at risk for being perceived as male. The purposes of this pilot study were to assess the reliability and accuracy of listeners’ perceptions of TE speaker gender and to evaluate the relationship between gender ratings and masculinity–femininity ratings. Twenty-five naı̈ve listeners rated the gender and the masculinity–femininity of 12 TE speakers from audio recordings of a reading passage. Listeners were able to reliably rate gender and masculinity–femininity. They accurately identified speaker gender at a high rate that was comparable for males and females. However, female speakers, despite being accurately identified as female, were at an elevated risk of being rated as masculine or neutral on the masculinity–femininity scale. Learning outcomes: As a result of this activity, the participant will be able to: (1) describe the reliability and accuracy of listener perceptions of the gender and the degree of masculinity–femininity of TE speakers; and (2) discuss the relationship between TE speaker gender identification and masculinity–femininity ratings for males and females, respectively.

Tracheoesophageal (TE) speech is often perceived as low pitched (Casper & Colton, 1993), hoarse, and sometimes strained (Kapusta-Shemie and Dromey, 1999, Most et al., 2000 and O’Leary et al., 1994). In laryngeal speakers, lower pitch and hoarseness are more often associated with listener perceptions of male speakers rather than female (Mullenix, Johnson, Topcu-Durgun, & Farnsworth, 1995). Conversely, higher pitch, less hoarseness, and increased breathiness are more often associated with perceptions of a female voice (Andrews and Schmidt, 1996, Murry and Singh, 1980 and Wolfe et al., 1990). In most instances, a lowering of pitch and a change in voice quality from laryngeal voice are anticipated for both male and female TE speakers (Casper and Colton, 1993 and Trudeau and Qi, 1990). Because a low pitch and a rougher voice tend to signal a male talker, the changes that accompany TE speech are not likely to result in listener confusion of the male speaker’s gender. However, given the marked pitch decrease and voice quality change experienced by female TE speakers, listener confusion regarding the female TE speaker’s gender might occur. This is particularly the case if visual or other contextual cues are not available to the listener (e.g., phone conversations, communication partners not facing one another, etc.). At present, there are no experimental data on the ability of listeners to identify a TE speaker’s gender from speech alone. However, in discussing the implications of their acoustic study of female TE users relative to esophageal speakers, Trudeau and Qi (1990) stated that, “… the female TE speaker will probably also experience similar problems with gender identification” (p. 249). Information on the ability of listeners to identify the gender of a TE speaker is important clinically. As Trudeau and Qi (1990) suggested, more informed pre- and post-operative counseling of female TE patients regarding the expected voice outcome would be possible. Although investigation is needed in this area, masculinization of the female TE voice could conceivably result in psycho-social as well as communication problems. Listener perceptions of masculinity and femininity of TE speech samples also have not been investigated. While one might expect speakers’ ratings of gender and of masculinity–femininity to be strongly correlated, they are not necessarily identical perceptions. For instance, it is not uncommon for some voices to be consistently identified as male, but be judged as effeminate (Avery & Liss, 1996). Interest in pursuing listener perceptions of both gender and masculinity–femininity of TE speakers is prompted by the results of two studies by Weinberg and Bennett, 1971 and Weinberg and Bennett, 1972 on esophageal speech. Data from these two studies suggested that a fair amount of masculinization of the female esophageal voice occurred (inferred from fundamental frequency data), but listeners were still capable of identifying speaker gender with a high degree of accuracy. It could be that listeners can accurately identify female TE speakers as female, but the listeners may still perceive them as masculine-sounding. Because this is the first report the authors are aware of dealing with such perceptions of TE speech, the first purpose of this pilot study was to describe whether listeners can reliably offer gender and masculinity–femininity ratings of TE speakers. A second purpose was to evaluate the accuracy of gender identifications of TE speakers. Finally, the relationship between listener ratings of TE speaker gender and their ratings of masculinity–femininity was investigated.

Although the number of TE speakers in this pilot study was relatively small, the results provide some guidance to clinicians working with individuals before and after total laryngectomy. Realistic pre- and post-laryngectomy/TE puncture counseling regarding the expected voice outcome presumably would facilitate the patient’s accommodation to the TE voice. For females in particular, it may be prudent to specifically address gender and masculinity/femininity perceptions of the TE voice. In particular, these results suggest that female TE speakers are accurately identified as female most of the time. Despite accurate gender identification, however, female TE speakers run a risk of listeners perceiving them as less feminine or even masculine. Whether or not such information is imparted, the timing of such counseling, and the level of detail given to a particular client clearly should be determined by the treating clinician. However, speech/voice presentation can have a notable impact on a person’s self-perception (Haskell, 1987). Knowing the likelihood of how listeners may perceive the new TE voice could help the patient prepare for the post-operative voice and some of the challenges they may face. Besides comparing these results with a larger number of speakers, an important follow-up to this perceptual study will be the determination of those aspects of the speech signal that influence listeners’ perceptions of TE speaker gender and the degree of masculinity–femininity in the TE voice. Once identified, it may be possible to alter the critical acoustic parameters, either through behavioral means or digital enhancement/alteration of the TE acoustic signal, to positively influence listeners’ perceptions. Additionally, a more detailed study of the perceptual features (e.g., degree of breathiness, hoarseness, pitch, etc.) associated with listener ratings of gender and masculinity/femininity are of interest. Degree of listener experience with alaryngeal voice could also be an important variable to consider in future studies. The clinical implications from this study appear to focus mostly on female TE speakers. However, it is important to recognize that at least one male speaker in this study was often rated in the gender ambiguous range and had associated ratings in the mid portion of the masculinity–femininity scale (i.e., neither strongly masculine nor feminine). Although such an occurrence for a male speaker may be an exception, it did occur. Investigation of male voices that appear to be exceptions to the overall trend of accurate gender identification should allow deeper insights into the relationship between TE speech acoustics and perceptions of gender and masculinity–femininity.