↓ Skip to main content

Michigan Publishing

Article Metrics

Laryngeal Hyperfunction During Whispering: Reality or Myth?

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Voice, March 2006
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • One of the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#7 of 1,295)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (97th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
118 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
24 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
52 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Title
Laryngeal Hyperfunction During Whispering: Reality or Myth?
Published in
Journal of Voice, March 2006
DOI 10.1016/j.jvoice.2004.10.007
Pubmed ID
Authors

Adam D. Rubin, Veeraphol Praneetvatakul, Shirley Gherson, Cheryl A. Moyer, Robert T. Sataloff

Abstract

For years, otolaryngologists and voice therapists have warned voice patients that whispering causes more trauma to the larynx than normal speech. However, no large series of patients has ever been examined fiberoptically during whispering to test this hypothesis. As part of our routine examination, patients are asked to count from 1 to 10 in a normal voice and in a whispered voice. We reviewed recorded fiberoptic examinations of 100 patients who had voice complaints. We compared supraglottic hyperfunction and vocal fold closure during the normal and whispered phonation of each patient. Sixty-nine percent of the patients demonstrated increased supraglottic hyperfunction with whispered voice. Eighteen percent had no change, and 13% had less severe hyperfunction. The most common glottal configuration during whisper was an inverted Y, which resulted from compression of the anterior and middle thirds of the true vocal folds. However, 12 patients had no true vocal fold contact during whispered voice, despite having adequate glottic closure with normal voice. Although whispering involves more severe hyperfunction in most patients, it does not seem to do so in all patients. In some patients, it may be less traumatic than normal voice.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 118 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 52 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Turkey 1 2%
United States 1 2%
Unknown 50 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 21%
Professor 7 13%
Student > Master 6 12%
Professor > Associate Professor 5 10%
Researcher 4 8%
Other 11 21%
Unknown 8 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 15 29%
Linguistics 8 15%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 10%
Arts and Humanities 3 6%
Neuroscience 3 6%
Other 5 10%
Unknown 13 25%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 108. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 05 July 2020.
All research outputs
#195,646
of 15,880,245 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Voice
#7
of 1,295 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#3,629
of 289,490 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Voice
#1
of 44 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 15,880,245 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,295 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 289,490 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 44 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.