Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Zoom in: factors affecting vocal habits during online meetings, a prospective trial on 40 subjects

  • Laryngology
  • Published:
European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

To identify factors that influence vocal habits during online meetings (OMs).

Methods

A prospective trial of forty participants without any known hearing or vocal cord disorders. Subjects participated in an OM divided into six randomly ordered sections, with alterations in audio/speaking equipment and language: the computer's speaker-microphone, a single earbud, two-earbuds or headphones; with/without video, native-language-speaking (Hebrew) versus second language-speaking (English). Each section included free speech, sustained phonation, and a standardized passage. Participants ranked their vocal-effort for each section. Three blinded raters independently scored the voice using the GRBAS scale, and acoustic analyses were performed.

Results

No significant difference in self-reported vocal effort was demonstrated between sections. Second-language speaking resulted in significantly increased intensity (p < 0.0001), frequency (p = 0.015), GRBAS (p = 0.008), and strain (p < 0.0001) scores. Using the computer's speaker/microphone resulted in significantly higher strain (p < 0.0001). Using headphones, single or two earbuds resulted in lower intensity and a lower strain score. No differences were detected between OMs with or without video.

Conclusions

Using the computer's microphone/speaker or speaking in a second language during OMs, may result in vocal habits associated with vocal trauma.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Availability of data and material

Data supporting this study are included within the article and further data will be available upon reasonable request.

References

  1. Cucinotta D, Vanelli M (2020) WHO declares COVID-19 a pandemic. Acta Biomed 91(1):157–160. https://doi.org/10.23750/abm.v91i1.9397

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Corman VM, Landt O, Kaiser M et al. Detection of 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) by real-time RT-PCR. Eurosurveillance. 2020;25(3). https://doi.org/10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2020.25.3.2000045

  3. Tarkar P (2020) Impact Of Covid-19 pandemic on education system role of education in future prospects after retirement view project artificial intelligence in human resource practices with challenges and future directions view project impact Of Covid-19 pandemic on education system. Int J Adv Sci Technol 29(9s):3812–3814

    Google Scholar 

  4. Mattioli D, Putzier K. Someday the coronavirus pandemic will release its grip on our lives and we will return to the workplace. The question is: Will there be an office to go back to when this is all over? Wall Str J. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.otc.2019.03.006

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Ceurstemont S. Teleworking is here to stay – here’s what it means for the future of work, Horizon – The EU Research & Innovation Magazine, 1 September 2020. Available at: https://horizon-magazine.eu/article/teleworking-here-stay-here-s-what-it-means-future-work.html

  6. Lionel Sujay Vailshery. Global R&D spending of Zoom worldwide 2019–2022 [Internet]. Access at 01/09/2022. Available at: https://www.statista.com/statistics/1252732/zoom-r-and-d-expenditure-worldwide/.

  7. Lionel Sujay Vailshery. Zoom daily meeting participants worldwide 2019–2020 [Internet]. . Access at 01/09/2022. Available at: https://www.statista.com/statistics/1253972/zoom-daily-meeting-participants-global/

  8. Lionel Sujay Vailshery. Microsoft Teams: number of daily active users 2019–2021 [Internet]. . Access at 01/09/2022.Available at: https://www.statista.com/statistics/1033742/worldwide-microsoft-teams-daily-and-monthly-users/

  9. Siqueira LTD, Vitor J da S, Dos Santos AP, Silva RLF, Moreira PAM, Veis Ribeiro V. Influence of the characteristics of home office work on self-perceived vocal fatigue during the COVID-19 pandemic. Logoped Phoniatr Vocol. 2021:1–5. https://doi.org/10.1080/14015439.2021.1961310

  10. Siqueira LTD, Santos AP dos, Silva RLF, Moreira PAM, Vitor J da S, Ribeiro VV. Vocal Self-Perception of Home Office Workers During the COVID-19 Pandemic. J Voice. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2020.10.016

  11. Kenny C (2020) Dysphonia and Vocal Tract Discomfort While Working From Home During COVID-19. Journal of Voice Published online. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2020.10.010

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Lombard É. “Le signe de l'élévation de la voix”. Annales des Maladies de l'Oreille et du Larynx. 1911;XXXVII(2):101–9

    Google Scholar 

  13. Lane H, Tranel B (1971) The Lombard Sign and the Role of Hearing in Speech. J Speech Hear Res 14(4):677–709. https://doi.org/10.1044/jshr.1404.677

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Summers W Van, Pisoni DB, Bernacki RH, Pedlow RI, Stokes MA. Effects of noise on speech production: acoustic and perceptual analyses.

  15. Zollinger SA, Brumm H (2011) The Lombard effect. Curr Biol 21(16):R614–R615. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2011.06.003

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Vilkman E (2000) Voice Problems at Work: A Challenge for Occupational Safety and Health Arrangement. 52

  17. Jó Nsdó Ttir VI, Jónsdóttir VI (2002) Cordless amplifying system in classrooms. a descriptive study of teachers’ and students’ opinions 

  18. Jónsdottir V, Laukkanen AM, Siikki I (2003) Changes in teachers’ voice quality during a working day with and without electric sound amplification. Folia Phoniatr Logop 55(5):267–280. https://doi.org/10.1159/000072157

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Rubin AD, Codino J, Costeloe A, Johns MM, Collum A, Bottalico P (2021) The effect of unilateral hearing protection on vocal intensity with varying degrees of background noise. J Voice 35(6):886–891. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2020.03.019

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Tomassi NE, Castro ME, Timmons Sund L, Díaz-Cádiz ME, Buckley DP, Stepp CE (2021) Effects of sidetone amplification on vocal function during telecommunication. J Voice. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2021.03.027

  21. Laukkanen AM, Mickelson NP, Laitala M, Syrjä T, Salo A, Sihvo M (2004) Effects of HearFones on speaking and singing voice quality. J Voice 18(4):475–487. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2003.05.007

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Kisenwether JS, Anson D (2019) Cell Yell!: Health Risks in Telehealth. Perspect ASHA Spec Interest Groups 4(3):538–541. https://doi.org/10.1044/2019_PERS-SIG18-2018-0005

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Effects of perceived listeners on speakers’ vocal intensity. 1997; 67–73

  24. Daedal Research. (2022). Market size of the exhibition industry worldwide from 2017 to 2021, with forecast until 2026 (in billion U.S. dollars) [Graph]. In Statista. Retrieved March 19, 2023, from https://www.statista.com/statistics/1261257/global-meetings-industry-market-size/

  25. Järvinen K, Laukkanen AM (2015) Vocal Loading in Speaking a Foreign Language. Folia Phoniatr Logop 67(1):1–7. https://doi.org/10.1159/000381183

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Järvinen K, Laukkanen AM, Aaltonen O (2013) Speaking a foreign language and its effect on F0. Logoped Phoniatr Vocol 38(2):47–51. https://doi.org/10.3109/14015439.2012.687764

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Amir O, Ashkenazi O, Leibovitzh T, Michael O, Tavor Y, Wolf M (2006) Applying the Voice Handicap Index (VHI) to Dysphonic and Nondysphonic Hebrew Speakers. J Voice 20(2):318–324. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2005.08.006

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Amir O, Levine-Yundof R (2013) Listeners’ attitude toward people with dysphonia. J Voice 27(4):524.e1-524.e10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2013.01.015

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Jó Nsdottir V, Laukkanen AM, Ilomä Ki I et al. (2000) Effects of Ampli Ed and damped auditory feedback on vocal characteristics

  30. Younkin AC, Corriveau PJ (2008) Determining the amount of audio-video synchronization errors perceptible to the average end-user. IEEE Trans Broadcast 54(3):623–627. https://doi.org/10.1109/TBC.2008.2002102

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Järvinen K, Laukkanen AM, Geneid A (2017) Voice Quality in Native and Foreign Languages Investigated by Inverse Filtering and Perceptual Analyses. J Voice 31(2):261.e25-261.e31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2016.05.003

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Chaves CR, Campbell M, Côrtes Gama AC (2017) The Influence of Native Language on Auditory-Perceptual Evaluation of Vocal Samples Completed by Brazilian and Canadian SLPs. J Voice 31(2):258.e1-258.e5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2016.05.021

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Ghio A, Cantarella G, Weisz F et al (2015) Is the perception of dysphonia severity language-dependent? A comparison of French and Italian voice assessments. Logoped Phoniatr Vocol 40(1):36–43. https://doi.org/10.3109/14015439.2013.837503

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Yamaguchi H, Shrivastav R, Andrews ML, Niimi S (2003) A comparison of voice quality ratings made by Japanese and American listeners using the GRBAS scale. Folia Phoniatr Logop 55(3):147–157. https://doi.org/10.1159/000070726

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Rousseau B, Suehiro A, Echemendia N, Sivasankar M (2011) Raised intensity phonation compromises vocal fold epithelial barrier integrity. Laryngoscope 121(2):346–351. https://doi.org/10.1002/lary.21364

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  36. Pinarbasli MO, Kaya E, Ozudogru E et al (2019) Acoustic Analysis of Soccer Fans in Acute Phonotrauma After the Match. J Voice 33(2):129–134. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2017.10.004

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Sharma A, Sharma H, Munjal S, Panda N (2022) Acoustic, Perceptual, and Laryngoscopic Changes Post Vocal Abuse at a College Fest. J Voice 36(5):690–694. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2020.07.029

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

None.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Otolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, Kaplan Medical Center, Rehovot, Israel

    Sapir Pinhas & Yonatan Lahav

  2. Faculty of Medicine, the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem, Israel

    Sapir Pinhas & Yonatan Lahav

  3. Department of Otolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, Rabin Medical Center, Petach Tikva, Israel

    Shani Shteinberg, Yaniv Hamzany, Saja Assi & Hagit Shoffel-Havakuk

  4. Sackler Faculty of Medicine, Tel-Aviv University, Tel-Aviv, Israel

    Shani Shteinberg, Idit Tessler, Yaniv Hamzany, Saja Assi & Hagit Shoffel-Havakuk

  5. Department of Otolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, Sheba Medical Center, Ramat Gan, Israel

    Idit Tessler

Authors
  1. Sapir Pinhas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Shani Shteinberg
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Yonatan Lahav
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Idit Tessler
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Yaniv Hamzany
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Saja Assi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Hagit Shoffel-Havakuk
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Sapir Pinhas: designed the study, recruited the participants, conducted the online meetings and recorded them, collected the data, analyzed and interpreted the data, wrote the draft, approved the version to be published, agreed to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved. Shani Shteinberg: recruited the participants, conducted the online meetings and collected the data, analyzed and interpreted the data, approved the version to be published, agreed to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved. Yonatan Lahav: interpreted data for the work; critically revised the work, approved the version to be published, agreed to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved. Idit Tessler: critically revised the work, approved the version to be published, agreed to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved. Yaniv Hamzany: critically revised the work, approved the version to be published, agreed to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved. Saja Assi: critically revised the work, approved the final version to be published, agreed to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved. Hagit Shoffel-Havakuk: designed the study; recruited the participants, conducted the online meetings and recorded them; collected, analyzed and interpreted the data for the work; critically revised the work, approved the final version to be published, agreed to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sapir Pinhas.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interests

None.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file 1 (DOCX 18.8 kb)

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Pinhas, S., Shteinberg, S., Lahav, Y. et al. Zoom in: factors affecting vocal habits during online meetings, a prospective trial on 40 subjects. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 281, 3039–3049 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00405-024-08580-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00405-024-08580-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation