Choosing a scale for measuring perceived prominence

Christian Jensen; John Tøndering

Choosing a scale for measuring perceived prominence

15 Citationer (Scopus)

63 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Three different scales which have been used to measure perceived prominence are evaluated in a perceptual experiment. Average scores of raters using a multi-level (31-point) scale, a simple binary (2-point) scale and an intermediate 4-point scale are almost identical. The potentially finer gradation possible with the multi-level scale(s) is compensated for by having multiple listeners, which is a also a requirement for obtaining reliable data. In other words, a high number of levels is neither a sufficient nor a necessary requirement. Overall the best results were obtained using the 4-point scale, and there seems to be little justification for using a 31-point scale.

Originalsprog	Engelsk
Titel	Proceedings of Interspeech — Eurospeech 2005 : 9th European Conference on Speech Communication and Technology, September 4–8, 2005, Lisbon
Redaktører	I. Trancoso
Antal sider	4
Publikationsdato	2005
Sider	2385-2388
ISBN (Trykt)	1018-4074
Status	Udgivet - 2005
Begivenhed	Interspeech — Eurospeech 2005 - Lisbon, Portugal Varighed: 4 sep. 2005 → 8 sep. 2005

Konference

Konference	Interspeech — Eurospeech 2005
Land/Område	Portugal
By	Lisbon
Periode	04/09/2005 → 08/09/2005

Adgang til dokumentet

Interspeech2005_final

Citationsformater

Choosing a scale for measuring perceived prominence. / Jensen, Christian ; Tøndering, John.
Proceedings of Interspeech — Eurospeech 2005: 9th European Conference on Speech Communication and Technology, September 4–8, 2005, Lisbon. red. / I. Trancoso. 2005. s. 2385-2388.

Publikation: Bidrag til bog/antologi/rapport › Konferencebidrag i proceedings › Forskning › peer review

@inproceedings{5aed3b40a36311debc73000ea68e967b,

title = "Choosing a scale for measuring perceived prominence",

abstract = "Three different scales which have been used to measure perceived prominence are evaluated in a perceptual experiment. Average scores of raters using a multi-level (31-point) scale, a simple binary (2-point) scale and an intermediate 4-point scale are almost identical. The potentially finer gradation possible with the multi-level scale(s) is compensated for by having multiple listeners, which is a also a requirement for obtaining reliable data. In other words, a high number of levels is neither a sufficient nor a necessary requirement. Overall the best results were obtained using the 4-point scale, and there seems to be little justification for using a 31-point scale.",

author = "Christian Jensen and John T{\o}ndering",

year = "2005",

language = "English",

isbn = "1018-4074",

pages = "2385--2388",

editor = "I. Trancoso",

booktitle = "Proceedings of Interspeech — Eurospeech 2005",

note = "Interspeech — Eurospeech 2005 ; Conference date: 04-09-2005 Through 08-09-2005",

}

TY - GEN

T1 - Choosing a scale for measuring perceived prominence

AU - Jensen, Christian

AU - Tøndering, John

PY - 2005

Y1 - 2005

N2 - Three different scales which have been used to measure perceived prominence are evaluated in a perceptual experiment. Average scores of raters using a multi-level (31-point) scale, a simple binary (2-point) scale and an intermediate 4-point scale are almost identical. The potentially finer gradation possible with the multi-level scale(s) is compensated for by having multiple listeners, which is a also a requirement for obtaining reliable data. In other words, a high number of levels is neither a sufficient nor a necessary requirement. Overall the best results were obtained using the 4-point scale, and there seems to be little justification for using a 31-point scale.

AB - Three different scales which have been used to measure perceived prominence are evaluated in a perceptual experiment. Average scores of raters using a multi-level (31-point) scale, a simple binary (2-point) scale and an intermediate 4-point scale are almost identical. The potentially finer gradation possible with the multi-level scale(s) is compensated for by having multiple listeners, which is a also a requirement for obtaining reliable data. In other words, a high number of levels is neither a sufficient nor a necessary requirement. Overall the best results were obtained using the 4-point scale, and there seems to be little justification for using a 31-point scale.

M3 - Article in proceedings

SN - 1018-4074

SP - 2385

EP - 2388

BT - Proceedings of Interspeech — Eurospeech 2005

A2 - Trancoso, I.

T2 - Interspeech — Eurospeech 2005

Y2 - 4 September 2005 through 8 September 2005

ER -

Choosing a scale for measuring perceived prominence

Abstract

Konference

Adgang til dokumentet

Fingeraftryk

Citationsformater