Perception of Femininity and Masculinity in Voices as Rated by Transgender and Gender Diverse People, Professional Speech and Language Pathologists, and Cisgender Naive Listeners.

IF 2.5 4区 医学 Q1 AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY
Jenny Holmberg, Maria Södersten, Ida Linander, Fredrik Nylén
{"title":"Perception of Femininity and Masculinity in Voices as Rated by Transgender and Gender Diverse People, Professional Speech and Language Pathologists, and Cisgender Naive Listeners.","authors":"Jenny Holmberg, Maria Södersten, Ida Linander, Fredrik Nylén","doi":"10.1016/j.jvoice.2024.07.034","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To explore whether cisgender naive listeners, transgender and gender diverse (TGD) listeners, and speech-language pathologists (SLPs) experienced in providing gender-affirming voice training differ in their perception of femininity and masculinity in voices.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Samples of spontaneous speech were collected from 95 cisgender, and 37 TGD speakers. Three listener groups of cisgender naive (N = 77), TGD (N = 30), and SLP (N = 14) listeners, respectively, rated the voices on visual analog scales in two randomly ordered blocks, in which the perceived degree of femininity was rated separately from the perceived degree of masculinity.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The three listener groups showed similar patterns in their distribution of ratings on the femininity and masculinity scales. The TGD listeners' mean ratings did not differ from the cisgender naive listeners', whereas SLPs showed a small, but significant, difference in their ratings compared with both TGD and cisgender naive listeners and rated the voices lower on both the femininity and masculinity scales.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The results differ from previous studies as TGD, and cisgender naive listeners rated the voices very similarly. The lower ratings of femininity and masculinity by the SLPs were likely influenced by their awareness of the complexity in the perception of voices. Therefore, SLPs providing gender-affirming voice training should be attentive to how their professional training may influence their perception of femininity and masculinity in voices and encourage discussions and explorations of the TGD voice client's perceptions of voices.</p>","PeriodicalId":49954,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Voice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Voice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2024.07.034","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To explore whether cisgender naive listeners, transgender and gender diverse (TGD) listeners, and speech-language pathologists (SLPs) experienced in providing gender-affirming voice training differ in their perception of femininity and masculinity in voices.

Methods: Samples of spontaneous speech were collected from 95 cisgender, and 37 TGD speakers. Three listener groups of cisgender naive (N = 77), TGD (N = 30), and SLP (N = 14) listeners, respectively, rated the voices on visual analog scales in two randomly ordered blocks, in which the perceived degree of femininity was rated separately from the perceived degree of masculinity.

Results: The three listener groups showed similar patterns in their distribution of ratings on the femininity and masculinity scales. The TGD listeners' mean ratings did not differ from the cisgender naive listeners', whereas SLPs showed a small, but significant, difference in their ratings compared with both TGD and cisgender naive listeners and rated the voices lower on both the femininity and masculinity scales.

Conclusion: The results differ from previous studies as TGD, and cisgender naive listeners rated the voices very similarly. The lower ratings of femininity and masculinity by the SLPs were likely influenced by their awareness of the complexity in the perception of voices. Therefore, SLPs providing gender-affirming voice training should be attentive to how their professional training may influence their perception of femininity and masculinity in voices and encourage discussions and explorations of the TGD voice client's perceptions of voices.

变性人和不同性别者、专业言语和语言病理学家以及无性别倾向的听者对声音中女性气质和男性气质的感知。
目的探讨顺性别的纯听众、跨性别和性别多元化(TGD)听众以及有提供性别肯定语音培训经验的语言病理学家(SLPs)在感知声音中的女性气质和男性气质方面是否存在差异:方法:收集了 95 名顺性听者和 37 名逆向性别听者的自发语音样本。三组听者分别是顺性别的天真者(77 人)、TGD 听者(30 人)和 SLP 听者(14 人),他们在两个随机排序的区块中用视觉模拟量表对声音进行评分,其中女性化程度的感知与男性化程度的感知分别进行评分:结果:三组听众在女性气质和男性气质量表上的评分分布呈现出相似的模式。TGD 听者的平均评分与同性别的天真听者没有差异,而 SLPs 听者的评分与 TGD 和同性别的天真听者相比差异很小,但很显著,他们对声音的女性气质和男性气质的评分都较低:这些结果与以往的研究不同,因为雌雄同体听者和同性别的天真听者对声音的评价非常相似。SLPs对女性气质和男性气质的评分较低,很可能是因为他们意识到了声音感知的复杂性。因此,提供性别肯定嗓音培训的语言康复师应注意他们的专业培训可能会如何影响他们对嗓音中女性气质和男性气质的感知,并鼓励讨论和探索 TGD 患者对嗓音的感知。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Voice
Journal of Voice 医学-耳鼻喉科学
CiteScore
4.00
自引率
13.60%
发文量
395
审稿时长
59 days
期刊介绍: The Journal of Voice is widely regarded as the world''s premiere journal for voice medicine and research. This peer-reviewed publication is listed in Index Medicus and is indexed by the Institute for Scientific Information. The journal contains articles written by experts throughout the world on all topics in voice sciences, voice medicine and surgery, and speech-language pathologists'' management of voice-related problems. The journal includes clinical articles, clinical research, and laboratory research. Members of the Foundation receive the journal as a benefit of membership.
文献相关原料
公司名称 产品信息 采购帮参考价格
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信