Choosing a scale for measuring perceived prominence

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceeding › Article in proceedings › Research › peer-review

Standard

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. ed. / I. Trancoso. 2005. p. 2385-2388.

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceeding › Article in proceedings › Research › peer-review

Harvard

Jensen, C & Tøndering, J 2005, Choosing a scale for measuring perceived prominence. in I Trancoso (ed.), Proceedings of Interspeech — Eurospeech 2005: 9th European Conference on Speech Communication and Technology, September 4–8, 2005, Lisbon. pp. 2385-2388, Interspeech — Eurospeech 2005, Lisbon, Portugal, 04/09/2005.

APA

Jensen, C., & Tøndering, J. (2005). Choosing a scale for measuring perceived prominence. In I. Trancoso (Ed.), Proceedings of Interspeech — Eurospeech 2005: 9th European Conference on Speech Communication and Technology, September 4–8, 2005, Lisbon (pp. 2385-2388)

Vancouver

Jensen C, Tøndering J. Choosing a scale for measuring perceived prominence. In Trancoso I, editor, Proceedings of Interspeech — Eurospeech 2005: 9th European Conference on Speech Communication and Technology, September 4–8, 2005, Lisbon. 2005. p. 2385-2388

Author

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

Bibtex

@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 = "null ; Conference date: 04-09-2005 Through 08-09-2005",

}

RIS

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.

Y2 - 4 September 2005 through 8 September 2005

ER -

ID: 14490276